You do great work and I love it! Don't let Tony get to you. Ihre Arbeit ist grossartig. Weiter schreiben, eien lange Zeit. PS, I really liked the article about the church the communists blew up. BarkingMoon (talk) 11:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Sehr geehrte Gerda, I have a watch on your page since a few weeks ago. I approved and moved 167 to holding for June 24.BarkingMoon (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hereby award Gerda Arendt this Cherry Impact Event Award for the global impact your incredibly delightful sweetness and extraordinary talent brings to all of us!
I saw this image and thought of you and all you've done to help PS and Khazar. You are a bastion of refuge when the storm clouds come in, and I for one would like to thank you. Don't worry about people talking behind your back - as they say, "sticks and stones". Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! My pleasure, for a change: „Keep on Knocking“, „Sad Song“, „Free“, „Drag on Forever“, „Just What I Needed“ - just what I needed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:26, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence
The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence
I am pleased to award this MBE to you in recognition of your outstanding work on Wikipedia. Your numerous DYKs have achieved the noble goal of highlighting culture on the Main Page. Your work with other users is exemplary, and you're one of the nicest Wikipedians, always supporting and encouraging other users. Thanks for all of your superb contributions! MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM19:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your not saying it seems to have worked – it's been a week and I'm still here! I just finished my latest article (my first in a long time). It's about an artist who was born and raised in Germany and was very interested in music. For some reason, that made me think of you.... MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM22:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Knock on wood, as I blushed as well recently ;) Muggeseggele is still facing extinction while the Mans parking was guided so well to DYK by our fairy maiden - Glückauf Serten (talk) 10:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... with a pretty picture, but I'm lazy so instead you'll have to settle for text" Barnstar
Hi Gerda,
I saw your note on my talk page. Thanks for the kind words, and for being so refreshingly pleasant and un-bitter all the time. An inspiration to us all. I'm sure I'll see you around eventually, but probably won't be for a while yet. Enjoying my time away. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not by there very often, but today I saw the recent kerfluffle at AN/I and thought you could use some sweets. Lest you think this is all selfless, though, I brought a second fork. Care to split it? -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:33, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, sweet of you, - I would share with Andy first if his doctors allow. Day by day I hope the thread autoarchives (havn't looked today), - I am sure his doctors allow no stress ;) . Did you see the list of 18 discussions "drowning" a project? - Everybody who takes an unbiased look is welcome to share the baklava! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, the infoboxes clarification request in which you were named as a party has been closed and archived. The Committee clarified that acting on behalf of a restricted user to breach a restriction is WP:PROXYING and so is not permitted. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PROXYING, which is a policy says "Wikipedians in turn are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned editor (sometimes called proxy editing or proxying) unless they are able to show that the changes are either verifiable or productive and they have independent reasons for making such edits" (my emphasis). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits11:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda, nice to meet you. Are you really the Notorious Infoboxen WikiCriminal that has been terrorizing the music articles? :-) As you can see from my first posting on AGK's talkpage, up above the duromac thing, I am *also* a notorious wikiCriminal. Or at least, notoriously silly (AGK blocked me -- then later unblocked me -- when they mistook one of my not-all-that-funny jokes over on the Bishzilla talkpage).
But my actual question for you is this -- I did not really understand your reply to me.
(watching) Simply thank you! (I would use the button, but it doesn't work for IP. Also there's nothing secret here.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, okay, I understood the watchlist part, and the thank-you part. You are surely welcome. <bows>
But what button and what secret thing are you referring to? I do login as an IP, of course (you can call me 74 if you like), but User_talk:Clover1991 has registered a pseudonym; they are the one submitting the article, not me. Maybe the link to the 'secret' thing in my message was was confusing -- it is just a pokemon character, one of many not-very-notable-toys which has a long article in mainspace, badly in need of cleanup, and short on reliable sources. The pokeman-article is not related to the Duromac thing, directly, I was just using it as a metaphorical example of how wimpy our deletionist-standards are when something is 'popular' to some degree in the english-speaking-world. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
74, nice to meet you! (Feels like Lohengrin, no real name ;) - But then I'm a friend of 28bytes, also no real name but heart and reason.) - First: yes, I am the terrorizing witch, only nobody told me so far what that terror is, I see no evidence, hear only echoes of former wars. You enter a battleground: you are a warrior, - easy. Sparrow Mass: after gracing seven Schubert masses with an infobox I continued with Mozart, interesting story followed ;) - Now to your question: between registered users, there's a function where you simply click a button for an edit and have thanked the editor who made it, and it's more or less secret between the two. Sometimes I use it where I would not do it in public ;) - I wanted to thank you for your diligent research and the way to present it, I watch AGK since this, more recently this, - the former was more fun ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciate your thank-you, kind and gracious humanoid. 74 does count as a name of sorts; think of it as a jersey number. :-) Since I am an outsider, and have only heard rumors of the Dread Infoboxen Wars, you should take my nutshell explanation with a grain of salt...
infoboxen oh nohz!
The story seems to be, that some editors who are very particular about *appearances* (the visual layout of the article and the style of how wikipedia appears to the readership) ended up annoyed at infoboxen *generally* as too data-oriented or too formal or too something, long before your arrival. So, when you came along with your wikithusiasm for spreading tightly-summarized knowledge, these visually-oriented editors mistook your love of the readership, with a crime of passion! <gasp> Personally, I never read the infoboxen, except in articles about chemicals, in which case I often *only* read the infobox-data. There is a new project, called WikiData, that has the potential to satisfy both yourself (e.g. there can be wikidata that the composer was born in YYYY that is easily accessible to readers *without* necessarily changing the page-layout) and the visually-oriented style-conscious editors; it is still in beta phase, and seeing the shape of what it will become is difficult at this point, but I have high hopes.
Anyways, what it boils down to, is an *artistic* argument about aesthetics: does the page LOOK COOLER without the infoboxen, or with the infoboxen? As with any argument about looking fashionable, there is always going to be more heat than light, more noise than signal, and so on. The arbcom decision to make infoboxen illegal, and you a notorious wikiCriminal, was a deeply flawed pragmatically-motivated attempt to keep talkpage decorum, to end the endless aesthetically-motivated edit-wars, and in general decide the fashion-question by fiat. The problem is that they ended up compromising our deepest principle, the encyclopedia anyone can edit, which boils down to Liberty. (The second, unstated, half of the principle was also run over with a tank: Liberty and wikiJustice for all.)
You can see the same kind of respect-my-authoritah problems elsewhere, with the ever-growing list of Arbitrarily Enforced Discretionary Sanction topics (which will soon cover half of mainspace), the ever-growing list of semi-protected pages (the encyclopedia only Real Contributors can edit), and in so many other ways. The rising authoritarianism is deadly[2] to wikipedia... growth in active editor-count ceased years ago,[3] and has been steadily declining since. WMF has proven they are unable to help us,[4] so we have to solve this one ourselves.[5] Part of the *motivation* for draconian pragmatic arbcom decisions that violate the-encyclopedia-anyone-can-edit, is purely and simply that no arbcom member, no admin, and few semi-admins-using-twinkle-huggle-stiki-reviewer-rollbacker-etc can spare the time to follow the five pillars. They are busy-busy, rushing from fire to fire, and there are no reinforcements coming, whilst the readership grows and grows and grows.
retention oh yehz!
This busy-busy crap leads to brusqueness, template-spam on user talkpages, ban-hammer first then let somebody else sort out the bodies, and most damagingly to aristocratic cliques and an us-versus-them caste-system wikiCulture. Worst of all, it is a vicious cycle where we shoot ourselves in the foot, every single day: nobody spares the time to be nice to beginners, so they leave, wikipedia is no damn fun. That means we'll *never* get reinforcements, we'll *never* be less busy-busy, we'll *always* suffer from steadily declining WP:RETENTION.
Okay, enough whining: I am quite sure the problems can be fixed. We need to have a vast influx of new blood, and the only way to do that is by making wikipedia fun again. I am forming a not-a-cabal, which will rule the wikiverse with the iron fist of friendlyism, and force wikipedians to enjoy themselves here whether they like it or not. You are cordially invited to join. :-) The not-a-cabal runs on a shoestring at the moment, holding brief meetings in the back alleys of the wikiverse on various user-talkpages, plus some of our agents have infiltrated the staid and prestigious halls of the WT:WER... but with any luck soon the not-a-cabal agents (colloquially known as WP:NICE nazis) will be everywhere.
Our goal is simple: steady inexorable growth of editors that contribute at least 5+edits/month, from the current 31k-and-falling figure today, to one million for enWiki. The trick is to make sure they are 99% Good Eggs, which means we have to assume that at least 1% of humanity is basically good -- enWiki has a couple-few hundred million uniques per month in terms of readership, at the moment. My core assertion, and key assumption, is simply that way more than 31k of those people are Real Contributors; if we want them to stay, all we have to do, is simply to keep from driving them away.
We get literally 1000 new editors every month! Problem is, we lose 1050 editors, every month; that *must* stop. Thanks for listening, and thanks for improving wikipedia. p.s. Upgrades,[6] unofficial tutorial,[7] and the 'official' helpdocs,[8] too. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your cogent arguments on infoboxes for all biographies, so the "look and feel" of Wikipedia extends to all people. The arguments against them for certain classes of people is just silly. I love the way you have collected their specious arguments. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Placing an article in Category:Biography articles without infoboxes is not, in my view, requesting proxy editing on your behalf (or more specifically Andy Mabbett's behalf in this case). It is simply stating a fact, "this article has no infobox". Any editor can act on it (or not) without "getting into trouble" after evaluating the article and without reference to the specific editor who added the article to the category. That is much more in keeping with both the spirit and the letter of your ArbCom restriction and subsequent clarification than going to an individual editor's page, giving them a "Precious Award", and then following it up by informing them that you are looking for someone to make a proxy edit for you if they are "unafraid of arbcom sanctions". Voceditenore (talk) 11:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing out the possibility of the talk page request which I didn't know. I would like to use it a lot, but who am I to say "needs an infobox", ever? I was told again and again that it's a content decision by the "principal author". I didn't mark the straightforward approach you mention above as humour, sorry, I thought it was obvious, - my only weapon in the battle against absurdity ;) - Who created Victor Bruns? The one who formatted a machine translation? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"I would like to use it a lot, but who am I to say 'needs an infobox', ever?" I'm not following your reasoning at all, Gerda. Or perhaps you meant that humourously? Every time you suggest an infobox on an article talk page complete with a fully filled-in model for someone else to add (as you did at Talk:Mark Williams-Thomas, Talk:Grange Court, Talk:Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig, BWV 26, Talk:Wilfred Byng Kenrick, etc. etc.) you are saying the article needs an infobox. There's no difference between that and simply adding the "needs-infobox" parameter to a project banner instead. As for who created Victor Bruns, it was the person who made the red link turn blue by adding, formatting, and referencing a machine translation of the equivalent German Wikipedia article, i.e. Dr. Blofeld. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:39, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No. Possibly I have a language difficulty. "Needs" means - at least for me - a different thing than "I suggest". I believe that every article would we be better with an infobox, but to my (admittedly failing) memory I never said that an article needs one. - Failing memory: I remembered working on the Bruns article so well that I failed to check the history. - I stopped pointing out my restrictions on article talk pages: what would our readers think? - I suggested infoboxes for Andy more than for myself because I believe that his restriction - not to add infoboxes to his own articles as if he was in conflict with himself - is absurd. - On a hike, I thought that humour also helps a bit to cope with loss, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The clear implication to the reader of someone "suggesting" the addition of an infobox to an article and pasting a complete mock-up of it on the talk page is that in their view the article should have it. Otherwise, why on earth would they suggest one? On the other hand, the needs-infobox = yes parameter actually displays on the talk page as:
'"An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article." [my bolding]
There is no essential difference between the two in terms of their implicature or in terms of the speech act they encode, i.e. an indirect request for action. Trust me, I wrote a textbook for beginners on pragmatics. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Voceditenore, thank you for clarifying and teaching! I would not have imagined that a parameter "needs an infobox" would translate to "may need to be added", which is more careful. But it's still not what I would say. No article "needs" an infobox. I show by an infobox on the talk page that in my view an article would be better with one, and I spare another user the time to design it. - I will try your approach on Gabriele Schnaut, but first need to add substance to the article, - and I need to learn this language better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:32, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Listeners/readers don't simply translate words into their literal meaning when interpreting language and acting on it. They make inferences as to what the speaker/writer intended by their utterance. Scenario: You walk into the kitchen where Signora Voceditenore is doing the weekly ironing. You have a wrinkled shirt in your hand and you'd like her to iron it for you because your landlord has forbidden you to use an iron yourself. You could say any of the following (in descending degrees of politeness/indirectness), but they would all be interpreted by the Signora as you basically requesting her to iron the shirt:
I think this shirt would look better if it were ironed.
I'm looking for someone to iron this shirt.
I suggest ironing this shirt.
This shirt needs to be ironed.
Iron this shirt!
The Signora will do one of two things. She will either iron the shirt or refuse to iron it, but she won't have misinterpreted your intention. There will be several factors which will influence her decision to comply. How you phrased the request is probably the least of them. SignoraVoceditenore (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nice scene! I play the role of the Signora now: I would iron the shirt if the request addressed me personally: "Can you please iron this shirt? I would do it myself but I am not allowed to ... You could help me.", and I might be quite deaf to the above ;) - Unfortunately, the parallel doesn't work, because on an article talk, I don't like to talk about my shameful "not allowed" (now it says even "ban"), and I can't address someone personally. When I say "I am looking for someone", I don't mean a specific person. - Please check the singer, there's more now. I will look for better sourcing for the recordings, copied from the Spanish Wikipedia. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again!
Thanks much, Gerda, for the reprise of your award. It's refreshing and encouraging to encounter some kindness amidst the bellicosity, irrationality, and bigotry that I frequently encounter. TimidGuy (talk) 12:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Patrice Chéreau you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- Jburlinson(talk)23:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I want to thank you for the kind Precious award dealie you left in August. (Alas, I've not been on the site much at all lately. This has been a rough week for me as a writer, and I can't tell you how lovely it was to find your considerate words waiting for me here. Kudos for being so thoughtful and positive. Scartol • Tok19:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know that he helped me in a seemingly hopeless case in 2011, and again in 2012. (Look for my name in his well organized archive if not.) Who's going to help me now, in this seemingly hopeless case? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: I went to the Swedish Wikipedia to find out who wrote the excellent article 'tis the season' shown above, - he did, some don't like that, for me it was a revelation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:24, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You look at his last two archives, mostly of one day, matters of COI and outing, - he - integrity in person - didn't want to serve on arbcom with the slightest bit of doubt. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Last year my present was an enlightening article titled "'tis the season" (shown above under the popcorn, and discussed here), - I looked for the author, no result, and found out now (to my delight) that it was 28bytes, - only others were less delighted, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, sorry to bother you and i hope you don't mind but Wehwalt sent me in your direction. Im looking for someone to write or help in writing the critical reception section for Rocky the Musical. The main issue is whilst i have a couple of sources in the article i struggle to translate from German (Google translate is terrible and i don't speak German) on top of that i have difficulty in finding other German sources for the opening night reviews as there are so many German sources on sites and some seem to talk about openings and others just in general but i struggle working out which are which.BletheringScot19:11, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the "Precious" acknowledgement that you made on my talk page back in December. I can honestly say that it made my day when I discovered it. I sadly no longer have time to contribute to the project, but it is very gratifying to know that my contributions back then are still appreciated.
I am very curious to know how you managed to stumble upon my contributions, though? It's been so long now since I was a regular editor here and I assumed that my work had been forgotten! Cheers, AshnardTalkContribs22:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I look every day, at today's featured article first, where I found you ;) - I remember the feeling when it happened to me in 2010, see my user page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Gerda, I have just noticed you have been engaging in The Great Game with WP over the past couple of months! Rather you than me... I am a vulture for quiet anonymity these days if it can be found anywhere. (Instead I am vainly trying to find useful fingerings for the Musical Offering fugues and to make my left-hand trills on fingers 3 & 4 sound like something other than a dying weasel. I also had a wisdom tooth out, which has wonderfully improved my vocal resonance - on one side only.) But, I hope you won't let such matters affect your seemingly infinite productivity or cause you to forget that you have many friends here. On the whole the value of the good far outweighs the annoyance of the bad, and when one considers how far the English Wikipedia has come and the work that it is doing there are bound to be frustrations along the way. May I take this opportunity of wishing you a very happy New Year. yours, Eebahgum (talk) 05:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, encouraging! If you look at my archive, the game did not stop me ;) - If you look at my present user page, you see that the treatment of the one who won the last round stopped me, - I think of Kundry's dienen. dienen, for a change. I love your apparition and wish you a happy new year, - we will sing Schütz, Psalms of David, for sorrow and joy, - what's sorrow in German? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately I was never tempted to aim for adminship. Even in my schooldays I was recognized as unfit to be a school prefect, for which I have since become very grateful. It taught me that my own personality, with all faults, was unsuitable even for basic training in officialdom. It was perhaps incongruous that a Quaker school should have had prefects. If prefects, why not Bishops? Liktors? It took us long enough to get rid of Ministers! One must listen within. Sorrow? Leiden (as in Werther) gets near but it doesn't mean the same thing, and Sorg is not the same either. Sorgen-schwerheit? To find an unbastardized sentiment one must consult an antique dictionary. Is there a German word for 'Sorry'? Eebahgum (talk) 13:12, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the words! It's a drawing by van Gogh, as you may have seen, a pregnant woman in distress. "Sorge" comes close and sounds similar. "Sorry" is "es tut mir leid", stronger "ich bereue" (I regret). Je ne regret rien ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hope is precious and great joy is found in living
Thank you for the sapphire—cornflower blue is a color of some significance to me.
In the maelstrom that Wikipedia can sometimes be, remember these words from Ode to Joy:
Wem der große Wurf gelungen,
Eines Freundes Freund zu sein,
Wer ein holdes Weib errungen,
Mische seinen Jubel ein!
Ja, wer auch nur eine Seele
Sein nennt auf dem Erdenrund!
Und wer's nie gekonnt, der stehle
Weinend sich aus diesem Bund!
Dear Gerda, thanks so much for this - always interesting to see recognition of CVA. All best for 2014. I am slowly beginning to root around on WP, presently trying to shape up Chopin. Warm regards, --Smerus (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the plunge ;) - You will notice that edit warring is going on, about whether to show Bach's original markings in Italian (Coro, Recitativo) at least once, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: If you think Wikipedia would not be damaged if Andy added infoboxes to articles that he newly creates you could say so here. Short, please ;) My point of view, but you don't have to adopt it: as Nikkimaria pointed out, his articles get infoboxes anyway (one by - then - an arb), but it would mean less work and feeling of "guilt" of those who add in what could be construed as proxy editing if he could simply do it himself. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Morgen, Gerda. I've just come across this fairly new page and thought you might be interested in copyediting or expanding it. Cheers, De728631 (talk) 08:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I could need some "deftige Kost". I left two projects recently, for different reasons (see my user page). Working on an article on music written for a memorial service, the day of the funeral of someone I knew (not too well, but enough to write his article), and in memory of the friend who just left us (see top): ... and give you peace, will sing that tomorrow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tschüß. Ich verlasse das Projekt. Ich werde nicht mit den Arschlöchern nicht mehr setzen. Ich will auch nicht warten, während Administratoren nichts zu tun. Es tut mir leid für die maschinelle Übersetzung, ich hoffe, es war nicht zu schwer zu lesen. GregJackPBoomer!03:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was easy to read. Losing the best - I say that since 2010. Every good one gone makes it harder to stay - the Lord bless you and keep you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!!! I like this move ;) - Those are no problems, I will fix wikidata entry, and sv and de have to do without the pic (which can't even appear here, sorry), same as for Duck Attack!, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What? Wikidata? Someone else did before me. Let's assume you wrote a stub on the game, you click on "edit links" under "Languages" on the left, that gets you to here, you click on "add" under links to the other languages, enter "sv" and the name in the next field, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I just knocked off this little article but it could use some improvements. I was unable to find any english sources on the school, but I'd imagine there would be several in German. I can read and speak some German, but I am by no means fluent. Perhaps you could help with improvements. Also, all of the red linked alumni and faculty have articles on the German wiki. Best.4meter4 (talk) 20:49, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So nice to meet you again! I moved you on the sad list a while ago. For the red links, use {{ill|de|article name}}, those knowing German can get more on single people. No more sources right now, sorry, and see above, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Rocky
No, i fully intend still to do it. Not been that well last few weeks so avoiding the things that take me out my comfort zone i.e. need a bit more concentration. Will try and complete next week.BletheringScot13:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, this is an article that interests me a lot and I'm afraid I got a little carried away with it! He's somewhat important in California history, was one the first photographers in the area where in the 20th century Ansel Adams took some of his most important photographs, and the paintings of the Gold Rush are important to the history of the state. Anyway, I'll post to the talk there about the edits I made (some have to do with the sourcing issues that came from the original .de page) and we can hash out anything you disagree with. Victoria (tk) 02:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It looks llike a nice start. First you have to link the article in the hook and bold that link. So far he is not mentioned, consider doing it, otherwise create a pipe link. Also the article is classified as a stub, remove that, it's no longer true. It's long enough and new enough, you have three more days to nominate. - When you are ready you copy the complete title of the nomination and insert it on the nominations page (the link is in the nomination, on top), under the day when the article was created (16 January), - follow the example of others. I could all do all this myself but think you learn more if you do it ;) - DYK that I am working on a bishop myself? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I checked 1978 and 2000 and did not find the album in the year article, so I would not link those. But who am I - always saying that MoS is not holy scriptures, - better ask others ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
MMmm, an Idea. You see, those songs are very ancient, if you listen to that link. In the hymnals you can sometimes read, atributed to tis and than.. or just ancient praise. Hafspajen (talk) 13:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The wording attributed to Mary dates from before she gave birth, and she took ideas from Psalms of David (Schütz composed many of those), thousand years earlier, who took ideas ... ideas about a different fairness, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Those flowers, most are Marian symbols. Please, see that the link is RED! If you go ower to the German text... the Paradiesgärtlein, see... Even better. Now there is one thing for sure, the whole art history is full of those symbols. Am I failing to find this article, or really there is no such thing? Because, if not... Hafspajen (talk) 13:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda was on a hike ;) - (you can look at my contributions if you want to know what I'm doing. I don't mind stalking, I'm used to it.) - actually I should read more, thanks for the beautiful suggestion! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
....That Gaudeamus Igitur and Obstmarkt in Venedig - have you seen them? Can you show me? Wonder if I put them on right description - contemporary. (Who knows - might be war scenes...)
You made my day! with the safirer! the only better day would have been tomorrow, because 30 Jan was the day I gave Precious to the author and photographer. The Magnificat will go to the ain page, pictured ; - now to work: now, I haven't seen the two, but they were mentioned in German. No war, Gaudeamus is Latin, and linked, a students' drinking song, fruit market is also no war scene. Contemporary we can't tell, not seeing them. - Can you find sources? No DYK without them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
German has books, in this case one, I don't have it, I don't know which fact what page. That's #1. But I mean for the rest. Someone will say OR (original research). Jerome Kohl is kind of an institution, even a composer, but not a reliable source in DYK sense ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did realised his intelligence, Jerome Kohl striked me that a smart guy. The problem is - well - that Höger might be in a local German artist's book, but he did not reached international fame. Nothing in my artbooks so far. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible to find a source. Many (even very good) artists sometime are not known outside their own countries, like for example Tivadar Kosztka Csontváry - a deeply original but unkown artist. Hafspajen (talk) 22:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I used Jerome Kohl 's words, because it was convenient but - but I can see for myself that the clothes, the furniture and the hairstyle is Rokoko, (I guess it is OR from my side), there is an other picture that says clearly that the painting is representing Rokoko era.(commons) The others are in clothigh like 1870-th. Compare James Tissot. But maybe there will be no DYK then. Hafspajen (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How about something like this? [10] I am no good at finding refs on him. He is just not know enough. But his paintings are sold and bought, one can see that on the art auctions. Yngvadottir is the expert on this kind of things, not me. The German libraries might have books, - or Austrian books - might have somehing I can't find... How about Jerome Kohl? He said he was inteserted. Hafspajen (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm, Lovis Corinth in New York Times is also a good source. I mean maybe it is possible to fing something like this for this Höger. Hafspajen (talk) 18:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Let go, no blast please. I suggest the following: I nominate, and if it's not taken we go to the next. "Waste of time", not good ;) - Click on 28bytes on top and look for the phrase ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the same but please put this somewhere else, I archived but didn't want to miss the Preziosen. Look in his archives for the sad story, my version. (Shortcut: my user, "my facts") --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 22 January 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ernst Roth, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Ernst Roth, general manager of Boosey & Hawkes, published four late songs by Richard Strauss in 1950 after the composer's death, naming them Four Last Songs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ernst Roth. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Lovely! If someone minds that "Song of Mary" is not German, we can place "German" out of the pipe link, otherwise this is better because people might think it's what they know already. We rehearse it and will sing it in July! - Would you know an image that would match this 1990 Magnificat (that we sang in 2006), along with "The Lord bless you and keep you"? With a rose, if possible. - Did you click on "blushing" above? (where I "keep you"?) - Did you know that I keep a blueduck? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:45, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the missed and banned ones wrote on video games, a mathematician and a supposed witch I translate, - it's my little opposition against witch hunt. I can't translate for the scuttled one with whom I shared your prize, - he never owned an article, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are four bits there, which to me, could either be reworked to prose and using the quotations as a source, or just leave them out. For argument's sake, I'll copy-pasty them here to show what I mean.
"The 'Pioneer' [Kandinsky] did not just produce a body of work whose sensuous magnificence and rich inventiveness eclipse even the most remarkable of his contemporaries. He also provided an explicit theory of abstract painting, exposing its principles with the utmost precision and clarity. So, the painted work is accompanied with a group of texts that at the same time clarify his work and make Kandinsky one of the main theorists of art. Facing the hieroglyphs of the last canvases of the Parisian period (which are said to be the most difficult), they provide the Rosetta stone on which the meaning of these mysterious figures is inscribed"
With this quotation we cross neutrality, because we don't offer any criticism on Kandinksy. It is filled with unnecessary praise: "The 'Pioneer' [Kandinsky]", "sensuous magnificence", "rich inventiveness eclipse even the most remarkable of his contemporaries", "utmost precision and clarity".
"Kandinsky was fascinated by the expressive power of linear forms. Lyricism is the pathos of a force whose triumphant effort enters into action and encounters no obstacle. Because the straight line results from the initiative of a single, unopposed force, its domain is that of the lyric. When two forces are present and thus enter in conflict, as this is the case with the curve or the zigzag line, we are in domain of drama".
"Kandinsky calls abstract the content that painting must express, that’s to say this invisible life that we are. In such a way that the Kandinskian equation, to which we have alluded to, can be written in reality as follows : Interior = interiority = invisible = life = pathos = abstract".
Numbers two and three are supposed to be informative, but are more mysterious in tone: "Lyricism is the pathos of a force whose triumphant effort enters into action and encounters no obstacle" or "Kandinsky calls abstract the content that painting must express, that’s to say this invisible life that we are". So what does this add to the article? The only thing the reader will gather is that Kandinksy was greatly admired by someone (note that Michel Henry isn't mentioned after three paragraphs of his own words).
"Like the final climax of a giant orchestra, Moscow resounds victoriously".
Again, not informative at all. It was Kandinksy who said this about Moscow, so the quotation isn't about him or his work. It could be used in the article to show how he felt about Moscow, but not as a standalone quotation.
I suggest you revert to your version and copy the arguments above to the article talk as an explanation, and as a base for a discussion what to perhaps keep with source and context. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If...
Hallo Gerda. As you can imagine, since the last ArbCom election I've been following the infobox arbitration case more closely. You might be interested in how I would have voted (had I been elected) at the 2 motions that have been proposed by WTT. Motion Number 1, I would have supported: Folantin's duck test is quite convincing. It seems that Andy, or somebody close to him under his instructions, adds infoboxes as an IP to his article. I would amend the original ArbCom remedy to allow Andy to add infoboxes to articles created by him for 3 reasons. #1 It's silly to enact an unenforceable remedy. #2 Under the original decision, you, Gerda, can add infoboxes to articles you create, so Andy should be allowed too, under the equal rights clause. #3 The continuance of the remedy as it stands is punitive rather than to avoid disruption, which is against stated policy. Motion Number 2, I would have opposed, on the grounds that ArbCom should maintain an open door for any legitimate request. To ask for an amendment/revision after a shuffle in ArbCom's membership, is legitimate and can not be held against anybody. Cheers. Kraxler (talk) 14:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 2 February 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Franz Kamphaus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Bishop Franz Kamphaus(pictured) opposed the pope, "convinced that our way of counselling women would save the lives of many more children"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Franz Kamphaus. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 3 February 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Magnificat (Rutter), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in John Rutter's Latin Magnificat of 1990, the text of the second movement is a poem to Mary, "Of a Rose, a lovely Rose"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Magnificat (Rutter). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi, sorry I reverted your addition of The Crescent (Birmingham) to the DYK stats as it was added under January. I've been trying to move it into February but I'm not managing it - can I leave you to add it yourself, please? I did try doing a self revert but it will just make a mess as you've been adding others. Apologies again! SagaciousPhil - Chat10:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I noticed that the other day you offered to supply (did supply?) a QPQ for one of Andy's nominations. Another one is on the verge of being closed due to a lack of response (which has been going on for a while); I didn't know whether you wanted to be so incredibly generous again. I'll certainly wait until Andy is back on line and has a chance to respond before closing it myself, but I can't guarantee that someone else won't close it in the interim. Thanks in any case. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that it was plagiarized from bach cantatas almost word for word into German. I scrapped it and am working off the bach source..♦ Dr. Blofeld22:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) About the same thing for the composer, but own website, - most commented out now. - Possibly Bach cantatas took it from Wiki? (Also happened before.) - Will look after the other, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 9 February 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Der Kontrabaß, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in Patrick Süskind's play Der Kontrabaß, the double bass in the title role is a "constant handicap" to its player, "humanly, socially, sexually, musically"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Der Kontrabaß. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
My dear rose, do you think I am An English expert- Well because I am not - sigh. Yngvadottir is runing after me correcting my spelling and grammar all the time. But I seee if i can do something. Hafspajen (talk) 10:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are English expert enough for such a nice compliment! - I want you as the Swedish expert. You read what's there in Swedish, compare to what you may find commented out, and reword. Stress on reword, all in the comments is not good. I will be with you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I did what I could. Some people would't even let me edit great and important articles like Michelangelo because of my "poor" English, (see talk page) so I hope this will do. Hafspajen (talk) 14:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the instrument. The play was translated to 28 languages, I thought Swedish might be one of them. I can't DYK Karin, because we can't expand her 5 times, but what about the red link singer? Is she good for 1,500 characters of prose? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"encouraging clear thinking", - I am actually crying now, thank you. - It will go in the selection "blushing", above. I remember winning an argument by "facts and myth", that was two years ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Given your interest in music, Gerda, I thought you might like to assist in improving our coverage of female dancers which I am trying to promote in connection with International Women's Day/Month. You seem to be well placed to sift through the German-language biographies which have not yet appeared in English. I have started a List of female dancers but there are certainly lots of other important figures to be added to the sections on Germany and Austria. If you don't have the time or inclination to write up the bios, then it would be a help if you could simply add names to the list with a few words explaining each dancer's involvement together with a reference. Alternatively, you could simply add names to Wikipedia:WikiWomen's_History_Month/To-do_list#Dance. Any help you can provide to encourage general participation would also be greatly appreciated. Let me know too if you have any suggestions for improvements.--Ipigott (talk) 11:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great idea, and I have nothing urgent. I nominated a philosopher, and we work on a folk singer (see above). I am not very familiar with names in dance, but will have a look. Perhaps point me to specific German bios. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's great to have the names but it would be even better if you could transform some of the red links into articles. Strictly speaking, the list should not have any red links. (See previous lists such as List of women photographers and List of female architects.) As for the United States, there are so many names I think we'll probably have to create a separate list. That's why I haven't really started on it yet. But at the moment, I'm more interested in the countries where coverage is not so good. Anyway, thanks for your support.--Ipigott (talk) 16:27, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had to include Tallchief whom I reviewed for DYK ;) - I could create stubs, and a bit more on selected women, Keil and Vernon preferred. (Guess what, I have red links of my own, not here (you know why) but on de where I just enjoy the second day of the above pictured DYK, they keep them for two days), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Did you follow the link to "just" on top (to the latest sorrow)? - The above: Is it your translation of that newspaper article. Could you start her article, and we take it from there? I have about an hour now. Please be careful to use a different sequence and reword whatever possible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The 2 are her own website, that's there as an external link. Look for Swedish and use, I can do the other. Only that I have to take care of another tagged article. We have four more days ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean an userbox... don't know how to do that. Never been interested in useboxes. I don't like them much. I would prefer a picture. Hafspajen (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have never been interested in user boxes (show only one on the bottom of my user page). No, I mean a useful box. I compare it to the title page of a book, while I compare the lead to its abstract. Please look at Keil: you see at a glance that she is a living person from Germany who is a ballet dancer. Everybody can see that, even someone not good enough in English to follow the prose of a lead. If I look at sv:Franz Kafka I understand much more from the box, because it's structured, than from the lead. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, do you want me to do that? I dont use to them either much. Was that Kafka about the man who throw away his key, and dicovered he was not happy with it? Or was it Thomas Mann? Hafspajen (talk) 10:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I like to understand what "I don't like them much" means. (Sometimes I ask people if the love or hate them, because it's surprising how much emotion is invested in the topic. The answer to my last question was this.) If your dislike is not strong, you could copy from Keil ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda,
Danke schoen for the precious. As you may have seen in my comment on Philip's talk page, I have retired my user id and am doing my best not to be involved at all. I hope that you enjoy two great pianists an Rheingau although, unless I'm confusing him with someone else, I think one has a reputation for cancelling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.203.96 (talk) 00:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fermented shark, hákarl, is an example of a culinary tradition that has continued from the settlement of Iceland in the 9th century to this day.Svið: boiled sheep's head, served here with mashed potatoes and mashed turnips.
An image would be great, of the singer, I mean, and perhaps also the composer: could you approach them, asking if they are open to making a free pic available? Thinking about a DYK mentioning both, alternatively Rosenberg and her group. - About disgusting food: did you know that an editor claims having eaten his hat, cat and bat? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely. You Gerda are a bad girl. I did not promised, did I? Now you probably will go on like this until I will fix it. There is a minor problem. I don't load images. Gosh, I am from 2009, basically still. Hafspajen (talk) 12:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstood completely ;) - I meant the author guy promised too much (was sure the condition would not be met. Wish he had been right). You did the opposite, grumble but act, thank you! (We are discussed, did you know?) I will not do it again ;) - You don't have to load an image yourself if you get a link to an image from a lady or two, with a letter saying that it's ok to upload. My account was also born in 2009, did you see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda I like your style. You make me do nice iteresting things. How very giving is to edit articles with you. I always learn something new whenever I do a new article together with you. How many did we already? Something about five? Like joking around with you too !!! And you are always teasing me... Hafspajen (talk) 21:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS. Yust comee me for by you to as by to say: Pöpcørn!
Ps. By the way, I have areal important thing to say: I likee lake a lookee too – on Wickedpedia - on the little Pöpcørn... eh? Pöpcørn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
.Vad har blivit avbildad. Vår fader dyú som är i himlen, låt ditt namn bli helgad, låt ditt rike komma...
Pater noster, qui es in caelis: sanctificetur nomem tuum; adveniat regnum tuum; fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo, et in terra. Panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis hodie; et dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris; et ne nos inducas in tentationem; sed libera nos a malo. Quia tuum est regnum, et potestas, et gloria i saecula. Hafspajen (talk) 23:17, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I just remembered I have something really important to say!!!!!!!!! Pöpcørn! Sushy bowly shrimpy. Poppelicorn the srimpyy, i mickelyoweny iii little fishy dhrimpy shrimpy imm poppy oh poopelypopocorny hu, HELLOOO, YES+++ NOUÛU¨UUUUÛÛÛ^- shrippy shrippy popoycprny shrympy Hafspajen (talk) 11:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Gerda, and apologies for the delay in replying to your beautiful message on my talk page. To be honest, I was a bit overwhelmed! I love what you do, and how you help the community of Wikipedia editors to feel we are working in harmony on this amazing project. Delighted to meet you. — Hebrides (talk) 11:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Let me add my thanks and apologies for my delay in replying to your beautiful message on my talk page (Hope Hebrides doesn't mind me stealing his beautiful words....too good to improve upon...so I plagiarize....ach! tell no one!! :) Thanks Gerda! Dreadstar☥00:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Theater is the organization, opera house is one of three stages (looks like another is in the same building, Werftstr. somewhere else), but for history of Theater we need facts from the house, - the house will be almost good for nothing then ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Back to the medal: I populated it with all blue links from de, mostly stubs, some decent articles. If you like you could add a bit of life data and short description, and of course expand the stubs, - I'm too tired, and have stuff tomorrow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Gerda, for very kindly fixing the hook and the article for Forglen House, also for reviewing it! I just wish our best article fixer was here to help. I (like many, many others) have always received nothing but kindness, help, encouragement and support from him - I wish he would come back, although I don't think it's going to happen. SagaciousPhil - Chat09:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I decided more than a year ago that I would do that (I have a red category on my user page), regardless of other people, - I hope that Eric will come to the same independence. I almost broke it when 28bytes left, - but only for three days, then I translated his article to German ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:01, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cippi of Melqart
Hey, thanks a lot for your help on the Cippi of Melqart hook, as well as for your suggestion re: references in the opening paragraph. The article is listed for a peer-review, I'll bring it up with the (eventual!) reviewer.
Hello Gerda.
Thanks for your message and your comment.
The wording "causing a sensation" in the article Andreas Scholl was already used, before I made any changes. But I do agree that this is not a encyclopedic wording and should be changed.
--Blumenschloss (talk) 06:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you, now I remember, there was much more in that article written by someone who adored every note ;) - Looking forward to more, we had the pleasure to have him sing for us in Messiah in 2011, - absolute silence in the audience in He was despised. See also interesting discussion last year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your award! I only ever received one, and by the time it came through I had slipped off into inactivity! Feeling preciously amused and awesome! :)
P.S. I need some slight help, if possible! I have corrected the French version of the article Cippi of Melqart, but I can't do the same with the German article (Ich kann kein Deutsch sprechen) - you see, there's the 'tradition' that these artefacts were found in Tas-Silg, Marsaxlokk, but this is not the case. I sourced and explained the controversy in the English article, and amended the French one, but can't do the same with the mistake on the German page.
Edited it without an account, so you'll just see an IP removing the text on Tas-Silg and a summary in English to explain what was going on!
The text should be something along these lines: When the Greek inscription was published in the third volume of the Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum in 1853, the cippi were described as discovered in the coastal village of Marsaxlokk.[1] Before, their Marsaxlokk provenance had not been proposed by anyone, and it was more than a century later that the claim was discredited.[2] The attribution to Tas-Silġ was apparently reached by inference, because the candelabra were thought, with some plausibility, to have been dedicated and set up inside the temple of Heracles.[3][n 1]
Or you can just say that their origin is undocumented and put in this reference: [5]
References
^Böckh, A. (1853). Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, 681, 5753. Vol. III. Berlin.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Borġ, V. (1963). Tradizioni e documenti storici. Missione. pp. 41–51.
^Bonanno, Anthony (1982). "Quintinius and the location of the Temple of Hercules at Marsaxlokk". Melita Historica. 8 (3): 190–204.
^Borġ, V. (1963). Tradizioni e documenti storici. Missione. pp. 41–51.
PS. Il Duca di Mantuaaa dice...la donna e' mobile, qual piuma al v-ento, mu-ta d'accento e d-ii pensier-o....
I tried. template refn is not supported there, so I left it with the first three sources. - Il Duca is wrong, of course, as the opera tragically shows, and of the people remembered in the box on top, there's only one female, - it's the man who leave, for strange reasons, "la donna e' stabile", I would say, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Its a tough ride no? Dont worry, its the same for all of us, it might feel like people are getting at you, but they are not, and have the best of intentions. Stress is part of the package at FAC but hang on in there. For my part I am delighted to see the nom, and will see it through. Ceoil (talk) 02:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Erschallet, ihr Lieder, - it's not a tough ride (unless something happened overnight that I don't know yet, I look at messages first, then Main page, thinking about Precious, then Watchlist, then Sunday, so may not be until much later today that I have time). So far I found ALL comments helpful and directed at a better article. I think of adding images of the relevant instruments, easy access to score examples right where something is described, and would love help in adding sound examples, something I never did, unsure of copyright. Thanks for singing along, I enjoy it! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good for you. Its morning so BMV 147! Yesterday I went through the John and Matthew masses, but got stuck on Mache dich mein Herze rein as usual. Let me get some caffine and we can talk about samples. Ceoil (talk) 10:07, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good motto, BWV 147 ;) - A cantata for today is shown on my user page, in the DYK section. I plan St John for Lent (no cantatas then, silent time). What do you think of actually writing Church cantata? "Disinfo" - applied to certain features - seems the correct description for Cantata, - may its authors forgive me.
BWV 172 FAC
Hi Gerda. I'm almost ready to support now, but there are three bullets from my review needing attention: Two of them are changes I made and asked for your approval -- could you look at them please? The other is the "however" question in the translation; I think Moonraker may have overlooked your reply about the Capell Musici. --Stfg (talk) 15:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Translation
Winner of this year's Grammy (originally called Gramophone Award) – or Grammy – is an accolade by the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences of the United States to recognize outstanding achievement in the music industry) in the category of classical album of the year became the composer Karin Rehnqvist, professor of composition at the Department of composition, conducting and music theory.
She received the prize from Rector Cecilia Rydinger Alin, from the Royal College of Music, Stockholm who in the televised gala directed the male-voice choir Orphei Drängar, a new the classic price.
"We are quite shy, composers, we don't take so much space," said Karin Rehnqvist in his acceptance speech.Then she went on jokingly:
– But I would like to take this opportunity to thank the other nominated composers tonight: Mozart, Wagner and Stenhammar. They could not come.
Karin Rehnqvist (born 1957) grew up in Nybro, Småland. In 1980, she got into or what, in Royal College of Music, Stockholm, trained as a music teacher and later of composition.
Her breakthrough as a composer came with the composition Davids nimm in 1983 and since then she has made herself known in Sweden as well as internationally for both instrumental and vocal music. Among her most famous works, including the Cantata Sun song and several pieces of girls ' voices, Light of light for children's choir and orchestra and Concerto On a distant shore.
2009 Karin Rehnqvist was chosen as Sweden's first female professor of composition. The same year, she took the initiative to start the Organization KVAST (Female Accumulation of Swedish Composers).
She was nominated for a Grammy Award already in 1996 for the composition David's nimm.
See all the awards here:xxxxxxxxxx, some site. Hafspajen (talk) 16:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda I am not going to open this link once again, I had to close down the computer to be able to get rid of it, just went on and multiplied all over the place, could be some shit connected with it or what. Hafspajen (talk) 21:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: the above says she was Sweden's first professor of composition, that's even stronger than first of the KMH. I nominated her for the German Mainpage --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda! (I miss your prescence on the WikiProjects - is the ban forever or just a year?). Yesterday I created a new article on little-known silent film composer Irénée Berge. Now I'm thinking of a good DYK hook. What do you think of this: Did you know that Irénée Berge wrote silent film music? Or this: Did you know that Irénée Berge, who came from France to teach at the National Conservatory of Music of America, wrote silent film music? -- Any comments most appreciated! and vielen Danke! -- kosboot (talk) 14:47, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Will look. I didn't leave the projects because of a restriction, but even before, to avoid conflict ;) - If you look at my articles, my interests didn't change, I took care of a singer who's article I created and who died recently, for example. Did you see that I even dared a FAC in the field, BWV 172? Today, related: a Bach publisher, you will meet him on DYK, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(That stargazy pie is strange but funny! Congratulations!) For a DYK, how about (or is this too long): "Did you know that Irénée Berge, who came from France to teach at the National Conservatory of Music of America, wrote the opera Corsica, the song "Blue Bonnet" (the former state song of Texas), and silent film music?" -- kosboot (talk) 15:05, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I translated the pie, as before Duck Attack! ;) - Shorten: how about "Did you know that Irénée Berge composed the opera Corsica and the song "Blue Bonnet" which became the Texas state song? Leave "silent film music" for readers to find out, unless you think it's particularly attractive, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think the silent film music is attractive. How about I leave out the opera and just have a combo of Texas state song and silent film music - odd/interesting combination. -- kosboot (talk) 15:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sentimental me wants the opera, - look for "I love opera" on my user page ;) - "Did you know that Irénée Berge composed the opera Corsica, a song which became the Texas state song, and silent film music? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I like that! Although I don't want to submit that since you created it. But you can submit it, if you have time. :) -- kosboot (talk) 15:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks (I didn't wish to make you do the DYK nomination, but since you figured out the good statement..). Hopefully I'll be able to get better at doing these things. And thanks for showing me that list of composers! -- kosboot (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A cookie for you!
Not quite sure what I've done to deserve your very kind comment on my talkpage, nor do I believe I can even do something as nice, but I thought I'd let you know I appreciate it! Thanks so much; very kind of you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)16:05, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Gerda. Good morning! Thank you for correcting removing my indent. Re-"- Again a musician who's article I wrote died, see my user page. - " you will have to lead me to the name, please. Much searching to no avail. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| —11:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Waking up to a horn call: thank you, blowers! "Weiche, Wotan, weiche", as Anna Russell explains, means: "'Be careful, Wotan, be careful.' She then bears him eight daughters." - Please look at the discussion on Dick's talk and tell me what you think of it (and the image). (In real life, I have a friend called Dick who plays horn.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What is dense? (in this sense) - There's a link with Dick above (the one "very brave, very strong, very handsome, very stupid", even pictured), and a discussion on the talk. I had a lot of fun discussing, but it's possibly what got me the reputation of "battleground". What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Back to the my question: How do you like the discussion? - I am looking for someone brave (or stupid) to add an infobox to Waldfriedhof Zehlendorf (example pictured), because it's creator whom I would normally ask is absent (you saw his memory on top of the page - link from "just", the cemetery article was written with Paco in mind), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:07, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I understand fully. I enjoyed the reading the discussion. I have noticed that more often than not, the two adjectives combine to read ... for someone brave AND stupid to ... Do you have anyone in mind, I wonder(?) — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| —13:22, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, you might remember me from such Teutonic articles as Erich Kettelhut. I have just put some work into the Weimar Republic masterpiece The Mistress of the World, but I really don't have the time to push it for DYK. You or a Project member may have more of an interest in pushing this article, or just improving or linking it further. ...or maybe you may just enjoy the article. Yours FruitMonkey (talk) 21:42, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It did, and ran into edit conflict, - will wait a bit until trying again to get locations out the first bracket, highlight works, format years and translate German to "ed.", "No." and "p." again ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I came across Ida as a redlink at Paulina Lebl-Albala, another woman's bio which until now, had been missing from wikipedia. On another note, I hope you take time today to bask in the wonderfulness of your solo FA; congratulations, Gerda. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, your comment makes me even prouder! Date for this one: the centenary of the first performance is 20 May, but it was written for Pentecost, performed on various dates whenever that was. It would make more sense to me to have it on Pentecost, 8 June, nothing pending yet. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Thank you for the award (but could we have the young Bach image from the article, even if disputed?)! Thank you also for a GA review that thawed a frozen condition. I plan more, but slowly so, always telling another section of his life, certainly BWV 76, his second in Leipzig, for June 2015. Or should I try BWV 22, test piece for Leipzig, in between? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Granted! A long term goal could be to get all of the articles up to GA at least. I'm planning a similar thing with Academy Award winning films. Haha although there's rather a LOT of cantatas to do... Maybe 5-10 GAs and 3 FAs would be a better short term goal.. Happy to review any of them, although I might have to ask you to review a few of mine!♦ Dr. Blofeld12:17, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, refreshing. I didn't count the GAs, several, including the two mentioned above. More long term: one of the chorale cantatas (second cycle, perhaps BWV 125), then BWV 39 from the third cycle, Mass in B minor, St Matthew Passion. Short term: improve St John Passion and Baroque instruments. Another small goal: have consistent infoboxes for the articles for which I was the major contributor, missing in BWV 138 (discussed here), I need help. (I don't know if I will live to see a long-term goal achived: a consistent appearance for the readers.) As for reviewing in return: I happily read and comment in PR and FAC (see Enid Blyton), but leave GA to others. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:30, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a never-ending task, because once they grow there will be more. Did you see that I "blued" three myself for this one, two publishers and a hymn? A list of all the hymns that Bach used, as cantata movements or chorale preludes, might be another goal, - with many red links first. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I had a small question. On Gandydancer's talk page, you mentioned this: "1) expand 5 times (seems tough), 2) nominate and claim flu". What did the second point mean? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, it is always inappropriate to add an icon to someone else's review. If you want to make your own review and add an icon, that's fine. If you want to query someone as to whether they meant to add an icon and ask them to add it, that's also fine.
ColonelHenry had expressed doubts in other areas earlier. It may be that he thinks that ALT7 is fine even though those issues remain, or that he's satisfied that the issues have been settled or don't really matter. We don't know, and unless and until he places an icon himself, we can't be sure. In the meantime, please refrain from putting DYK icons for anyone other than yourself. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: I looked, and how right you are. What I would do is comment out all questionable sentences (hoping that some will stay). Gross typos, German untranslated words, a lot of work. Best advice: ask the related project(s), I wouldn't know the proper terms in biology, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to thank everyone in the great team to achieve this individually, but do it here, going on vacation, with sporadic access, - take care! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats on getting this article through FA and a well-deserved FOUR award...just to let you know, you can put a little top icon for FA, GA, and Four on your user page by posting somewhere on your user page:
For the FA star: {{FA user topicon|article_name=Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172|date=13 March 2014|icon_nr=1}}
For the FOUR award: {{Top icon|imagename=Four Award.svg|wikilink=Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172|description=This user earned a Four Award for work on Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172.|icon_nr=1}}
Just don't forget to change the "icon_nr=" parameter as needed. Good Job, Gerda. I very much enjoy your continued work on the Bach Werke and other musical gems.--ColonelHenry (talk) 22:04, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding [16][17], you may be assuming that, because the material was in quotation marks, the misspelling existed in the original source. From my reading of [18], this is not the case; misogyny is spelled correctly. Since this is a clear error of fact, I will be restoring the spelling corrections. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 05:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. DYK activity or not, some people think if someone said something negative about another living person, that is a fact that can be told, especially if it fills the news, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:17, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. You are a good editor. Just came back to give you a kiss.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pina Bausch 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:
are ambiguous and don't translate easily. "Kontakthof" is composed of [wikt:Kontakt#German|Kontakt]] "contact" and [[wikt:Hof#German|Hof]] "court, courtyard", resulting in "courtyard of contact",
* 1997 ''{{lang|de|Der Fensterputzer'' (The Window Cleaner)
Hi Gerda! I'm still concentrating on my female dancers. You might be interested in one of the stars of the Bavarian Ballet, Lucia Lacarra, I've just discovered. Although she comes from Spain, she has been dancing in Munich for the past 12 years. Maybe you would like to expand the article on the basis of German coverage.--Ipigott (talk) 17:23, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's the beginning (based on German, so far I didn't do much), my Lenten project, no cantatas during Lent, did you know? - Different question: what do you think of this? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:10, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly thought that decision was unwarranted when I first read it. Did he give you any kind of explanation? I don't know how the Arbitration Committee functions. Wildbill hitchcock (talk) 09:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The arbitration committee functions like this: people disagree on a topic, let's say infoboxes. Arbitration tries to diminish the conflict, in this case they found the easy solution to restrict two very active contributors in the field, Andy and me. Andy can't add any infobox, I can add one only to articles which I created. Let's better not discuss if these restrictions make any sense, or help our readers. They sure help protecting articles from infoboxes, up to a certain point. I had honestly forgotten that I had not "created" - in the strict sense the arbitrators understand - Polish Requiem. (I was the main contributor, back in 2010.) You are not restricted ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Then it'd be a matter to coming to a consensus on the talk page—if it's a classical page, though, the consensus could possible show up from "nowhere" to ensure the consensus stays on one side, though that doesn't always for them (see Talk:Harry Partch). Curly Turkey (gobble) 10:47, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) No, don't do that, you would be "subject to wiki-torture and sanctions by The Committee" ;) - no, just add a short infobox to every article YOU create, simply "composer (pictured if possible) / genre / time of composition", giving readers an idea at a glance that some strange Hungarian or Polish title is a composition (could be a book, play, you name it) of a certain time, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:56, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: Some think that classical music is against infoboxes, that is wrong. There are editors who believe that biographies should be without them (typical argument: we won't box Bach, - as if his spirit was damaged if we mentioned his data of birth and death). Compositions, however, have had infoboxes at least since 2007, not much contention there. Look at my latest FA (just above) and all the structure articles (guess why I had to write them as separate articles), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Once you have one for a composer, with his image, copy from one work to the next. More formally: {{infobox musical composition}}, with some basic parameters on top, complete below. Keep it simple ;) (I am not restricted to add parameters to an existing infobox.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, I will try to add infoboxes not only in new articles, but also in some others that I've created but in which I haven't placed an infobox yet. Please, be patient with me and chastise me if you ever need to. Thank you very very much, Gerda! Wildbill hitchcock (talk) 00:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Germany for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 02:35, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda. This article was created back in 2004, but was speedily deleted today as a non-notable amateur organization. Do you know of it? Do you think it could be worth an article? Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:47, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Akademische Orchestervereinigung (AOV) is the local orchestra of Göttingen, Germany. The AOV was organized by a collective of local students and other amateur musicians to bring high-quality music to the community. AOV usually gives four concerts per year.
An egalitarian organization, the AOV elects its own conductor, which as of July 2003 is Thomas-Michael Gribow. The orchestra specializes in the performance of classical art music as well as lighter, accessible contemporary music. Since 1991, the orchestra has performed the works of Beethoven, Bizet, Prokofiev, Lutosławski, Weber, Mendelssohn, Schubert, Bernstein, Wagner, Brahms, Henze and more. It gave the world premiere of the "Overture to 'The Bad Room'" by American composer Justin Rizzo-Weaver.
Categories: German musical group stubs, Orchestra stubs, German orchestras, Göttingen
Thank you, worth saving, more than 75 years of tradition, appeared in 1935 under Fritz Lehmann at the Handel Festival, so says Partenope. Göttingen should be added to an article name. I have other projects right now, but could help, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I moved Flappy Bird down DYK Stats due to the fact it was receiving significant views apart from DYK. Thanks, Matty.00718:37, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In my infobox, follow the link on Kafka. Most of the amazing hits for the most successful TFA so far were not because it was TFA but because of the google doodle that day, - we simply enjoyed the coincidence, also could not tell what share google brought exactly, while you see the views the day before and after. Kafka's birthday was a great day, - I miss PumpkinSky, see on top of this page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Average 30k, I think, - there are statistics but I am normally not so interested ;) - yesterday 12.5k, before 24.5k, before 10k, - so I may have thought too high, wait, Fuck had 27k, Jimi Hendrix 63,5k, - all have high hits the three days after appearing, because the links are still on the Main page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda! Your sapphire has been much appreciated all year. It's one of only three wiki awards I've ever received! DYK, I still shudder at the name Josiah Gregg? HUGS!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
She lives in Germany, and worked there most of her life, should probably have both in description and cat. (Sorry, it was a bit of a rush job.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the history of the article and the template, you see what was going on. Thank you for pointing out the template problem. Czechoslovakia didn't even exist when it was composed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:54, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Conductors?
Hi Gerda, I saw your thanks for the list of conductors that I put together in my sandbox. I don't see much value in it, apart from getting a bot to add a 'conductor (musical)' cat to all of the entries. I'm likely to delete it -- unless you want to take it/ copy it? Best, Scarabocchio (talk) 11:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Liebe Gerda, ich verstehe deinen Kommentar nicht. Wie weiß wikidata, ein interwiki zu machen wenn wir das nicht zuerst selbst eingeben? (Nebenbei, gut dass du noch aktiv bist!) Gruß. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:58, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. We last contacted you on 3/19/14. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 07:00, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for moving Alter Friedhof, Bonn to the correct place. I feel a little foolish because I didn't realize there was a German Wikipedia entry for it until after I had written the article. I guess my article can serve as a sort of place-holder until someone translates the other one. Brianyoumans (talk) 02:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Several points:
Move: no problem. German is difficult, changing the look of the adjective when the article is missing.
Article that exists elsewhere: It happened to me the same, when I created Anna Reynolds (singer) (RIP). Who would have thought that an English singer had an article in the German Wikipedia first. Recently I found (and created) two German singers who have no article in German - but in Spanish. Google first ;)
Your article may even be better ;)
Take from the other article what you think would improve "yours".
Thank you for your kind words a while back about Gerhard Fischer (diplomat). It occurred to me that Elizabeth Vomstein, mentioned in that article, might have been equally deserving of the Gandhi Peace Prize with Fischer (maybe some gender discrimination going on?). Anyway, I thought you might like to have a go at a DYK for her? Just a thought. --NSH001 (talk) 08:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your name came up on a Wikipediocracy thread about solid content writers who don't get the credit they deserve and I just wanted to drop by and do a little of that. Thanks for your work on behalf of The Project! Carrite (talk) 15:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, - I thought I got all the credit that I deserve, from infoboxes criminal and battlefield warrior to angel and excellence (just open "blushing" above). But thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
better park here, working on St John. They blew up the Paulinerkirche, see above, what do we expect? Respect? - How would you describe the difference between hard and tough? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's the mass we'll sing for Easter,- how did you know. We - the group pictured in my infobox. (Did you know who cropped the image for me?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I understand you are very knowledgeable about various aspects of classical music. Can you recommend a piece of classical music (or movement or whatever the terms are) that would be appropriate to listen to now when one's heart is broken and their spirit crushed by the failure of romantic love? This is not for me directly, of course - I am asking on behalf of...a "friend" :( The music should be especially sad and/or melancholy but not angry or bombastic (overall, I mean). Thank you for any suggestions you might make. Thanks. JDanek007Talk07:41, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hard to say without knowing for whom, and the one's musical taste. Winterreise is a monologue by someone experiencing the same, but it might be the opposite of helpful. Mahler songs come to mind also. The so-called Moonlight sonata is rather serene in comparison, - but that may actually be more helpful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for your suggestions. I do not have a sophisticated understanding or appreciation for "classical" music, as I have not actively cultivated my listening preferences for the "genre", but I usually find "classical" music in general to be reasonably appealing - save for the most bombastic moments. As a student I attended several performances of our local symphony and quartets, and I remember feeling an affinity for some of the works of Dvořák, though I do not recall the specific details. Thank you again for your time. JDanek007Talk17:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The second movement of his 9th symphony could have the right feeling for your friend, - he was kind of homesick. Look for his name on my user page, - I heard his 8th symphony in a desolate mood, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bracket bot wants to kiss me sexy bean, but gets only a rose. Any help for the failed romance above? - Look for passion on top and follow to my sandbox, - if Creation is a gem, what's my Passion? (... and it's only the beginning) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You all will need brooms. In the broadest possible sense, broomfighting is the art and science of armed combat against April frogs, leaving indecent messages, and is involving cleaning, dusting or antiseptic weapons directly manipulated by hand, shot or thrown (in other words, brooms, dusters, sponges, mops, dual brooms, and so on). Very similar to its sister sport fencing, it involves the use of non-lethal cleaning objects to strike opponnents and consequently claim victory. In contemporary common usage, broomfighting tends to refer specifically to the American School of Broomsmanship.Hafspajen (talk) 14:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't, I didn't receive a single indecent message in my wiki-life, instead kisses by the bracket bot, offer of a t-shirt (declined) and acknowledgement as content editor, a rare thing, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again,
I'm a bit confused. We started using ";" at the beginning of interview questions about a year ago when an interview respondent told me that ";" would format better for screen readers than the normal method of bolding text. What is the preferred method? –Mabeenot (talk) 03:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The final article uses semicolons for questions followed by colons for each response, so our current method should follow the example in the linked help page. –Mabeenot (talk) 01:36, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is fine. I suggest you present a colon for the first response of a single question, and/or write a short guide for people like me who fill an interview for the first time. When I wrote my answers I was not even aware that this was not an individual questionnaire. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
hmm
"the last one" would be the last on the list. "the latest one" would be the most recent. Just a thought while you are still tweaking the interview. Agathoclea (talk) 09:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, also for the exquisite cake. (moved beautiful image, - no image under a header for me please, even if TFA does it every day, and no more sighs, you saw "he who speaks a word of consolation" on my user page) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Formally: it was in the MoS, perhaps still is, makes sense to me: after a heading, the reader's eye is used to find text from left to right, doesn't "want" to travel to the right for the start. To see the difference: compare any of the nominations to the last one, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's Hebrew, and I inserted an image (the second), needed help especially for the caption ;) - Just had dinner with helper and wife (German) and their friend (from Tennessee), sitting outside above Johannisberg, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:43, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, and I hope I'm finding you well today. Could you check the last five edits on FK. A user seems to be trying to bloat the further reading list, which I don't see as a good idea. Also, there has been an addition to the bibliography but I can't see where this source provides a cite. I didn't revert as I wasn't sure so thought I'd check first. Do these edits appear to you to be constructive? Cassiantotalk17:05, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, thank you so much for the Precious prize. Ich finde Gefallen an, mit Ihnen bei DYK usw. zu arbeiten. Auch ist Ihre Arbeit sehr Wilkommen! 97198 (talk) 08:12, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Say it in the nom, and let's see what the critic says. I believe that nobody who doesn't believe will be converted by a DYK hook, or someone who does be irritated by the question mark. - Did you notice my problem with the other hook, regarding English vs. Latin. I want to avoid a formal question symbol. Do you have an answer? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We are not talking about the same thing. The hook suggests that the hymn is sung in English during the emperor's time, I find that misleading, but may be the only one ;) - I actually doubt that we need the English article at all, when most of it covers legend and history of the Latin for which we have an article to which that info could be merged, but again I may be the only one. - I questioned the "triumphal" on that article's talk in 2011, but don't have the time to ask again. It seems not biblical. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tod" (death) at the end of the third line. Another contrast is that of "Der große Fürst der Ehren" (the great duke of honours" and his humiliation: "mit Schlägen, Hohn und großem Spott" (with
Ah, delete, I am not appreciated. I'll' be back. I'm BracketBot. I love you still.
What language do you understand? I said I can't, it's too hard ;) - need sleep, ... read the article, see if you understand that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Woman with the hart of stone, [21], you brake my heart when you talk with me like this... I am a simple robot... I'll' be back for your Jägermeister anyway. User:BracketBot informs.BracketBot (talk) 20:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Come back to tell you I always keep your image at my art. BracketBot
found it linked, - thank you, met some people ... - no interest in the politicians, don't know the terms, best look at articles and copy from there, - anybody can do that ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
yes, indeed, and it's kind of strange that I "created" a new Wagner opera ;) - see above, over night, expansion welcome, while I am back to Bach for the Holy Week --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 12 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Michael Weiße, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when Michael Weiße published 157 songs in German for the Bohemian Brethren, it was the most extensive hymnal of his time, and the first organized by topic? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Weiße. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello Gerda. I sent you an email today. I am curious to know if it arrived, or perhaps needs to be re-sent. Ultimately I am anxious to see your reply. Best regards.—John Cline (talk) 20:58, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I'm not sure what waiting for a little while will do at this nomination: the nominator has basically said that there won't be any Wikipedia contributions due to pressing schoolwork for at least a couple of months, and expressed the hope that someone else might take on the issues you've identified, since that's the only way they'll get done. That's simply too long to wait.
Were you planning to try to find someone to deal with the article's issues, or do it yourself? If not, the nomination should probably be closed, since the nominator has said there won't be any more work from that quarter. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was incredibly cool to wake up and discover your message this morning. I'm honored. It can feel pretty lonely around here - thank you for making Wikipedia friendly today. You rule. All the best to you! Julie JSFarman (talk) 18:55, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your comments about my recent article - I would like to see it mentioned in the DYK section of the main page, as shown in the template. AtticTapestry (talk) 07:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda!! Greetings again. I was thinking about DYK the other day and realized I had another article in the works at the time of the Josiah Gregg dustup. I pulled out the files and spent some time upgrading Nancy Kelsey's page. Do you think that is enough added material for DYK? I ran the DYK check on it and I think I confused it somehow (or myself). It is not telling me if it is long enough or not. I was really careful about paraphrasing but again I'm up against the same problem for an editor working in old history - few sources and most of them are written pretty much the shortest possible way to tell the story. So I was careful not to paraphrase the source I was using - but I have no way to know if some other source changed it all around the same way I did! Your comments and suggestions would be most gratefully received along with your opinion if this is good enough for DYK. Thank you so much! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for removing my new entry from the list, Gerda. I wasn't aware that it's only a mirror of the mainpage DYK, then. I thought we had our own DYK for new articles from the portal (I wasn't really active here since the summer of 2012…). – Happy Easter to you, still!--Aschmidt (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you think we should add more DYK about Germany, that should be discussed first. It's not a mirror of the Main page, but selects only those related to Germany (however distant). At present, we sometimes have two "real" ones a day, see? ;) - Frohe Ostern! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.—I don't want to change anything about this. I think it's okay not to have our own meaning of the term Did you know… and to keep to the use a reader might know from the main page. So, let's keep it like this.--Aschmidt (talk) 23:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. Project opera told me that a prerequisite for "featured portal" was that their DYK were only those presented on the Main page (they have a rotation). Do we need other means to show new articles? I simply look at the new ones. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We'll probably never have a complete list of new articles. E.g., the bot does not find my new German photographer created yesterday...--Aschmidt (talk) 11:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your hints to the bot pages. I think, too, we will probably never keep track of all new articles, they are too many. But I have one more question: I've tried to put those bot-generated pages on one subpage in my personal namespace, as I have done on dewiki as a quick overview. This only works for article alerts, but it does not work properly for all new article pages. Clearing the browser cache does not make it any better. Can you see a reason for why the inclusion of those pages in another page fails here? If it just does not work, I'll add those pages to my watchlist and I'm done. – Thx.--Aschmidt (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2014 (UTC) BTW, we still have an external watchlist on Toolserver — as long as it works and as long as it's there…--Aschmidt (talk) 13:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see you are participating. Please, please ensure that you verify that the reference sources actually say what is attributed to them; this is one of the key problems already identified, that the content of the article does not match the reference sources. Risker (talk) 14:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: the first time "disruptive" was applied to me, I felt honoured. (I don't remember what it was, perhaps scheduling TFA, - I did that once.) - Did you know there's Disruptive Technologies? I think it was also Liz pointing out that disruption is good for creating something new. Generally; I am rather with the "disruptive" than those who protect a status quo as if it was something sacred, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
my memory worked: it was not the TFA scheduling (which was uneventful, thanks to Bencherlite's help, in the memorable time of anarchy after Raul had left), but an early Opera discussion, when I had added (in the process of developing {{infobox opera}}) an infobox to an actual opera to try it out, see? (I love the last example of the template, with the "self portrait" of a famous editor) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was hoping you might be able to help me (or know someone else who can). I have written articles on the German women's wheelchair basketball team that defeated our Gliders at the 2012 Summer Paralympic Games in London. All twelve of them. But the youngest player Annabel Breuer has no article on the Deutsch Wikipedia. I am looking for someone to translate my article. It isn't very big. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:59, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I started Annabel Breuer (User page, they go though an Import procedure). Adermann probably has two entries on Wikidata, will you ask for a merge on Wikidata help? I don't have much time today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikilllllove
French..? tree
OK; I can translate it but you go ower and start it and fix it, because I asked Peter Isolato to put a sign on my page :this editor left the Swedish Wiki, and he did it. Hafspajen (talk) 13:50, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Like any other article: write article name as red link (or in the search function) and click, User:Hafspajen/Remember. What I do is delete old stuff in my sandbox, - I can always dig it up in the article history. - You can also set up your own archives, just replace "Remember" by "Archive 1" or whatever you like. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem, this stuff gets me into international complications. There is a definite Scandinavian tradition, the bringing in branches into the house and decorate them with featers- also sometimes with candy easter eggs, called Påskris[23]. We very rarelly do whole trees and bushes in the garden, sometimes some excentric municipality, or parish or garden owner will do it, but most people don't do this at all. But everybody has branches and feathers on Easter in the house. (Well with the exception of the real mean counryside bachelor living in the woods, who is a miser and never succeded to earn a woman's hart and the Pakistani chef from the Mumbai restaurant). The Swedish article say it is called Easter tree in Great Britain, and something that is usual in Great Britain, [24], - now now I couldn’t tell about that. Sagaciousphil maybe can... Hafspajen (talk) 10:45, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, it's not something I'm particularly familiar with as a British 'tradition' so I did a quick search on HighBeam. There's a piece that was in the Glasgow Herald back in 2010 that luckily is not behind a paywall here and that seems to bear out that it's something that is only recent to the UK - does that help or will I look for more? SagaciousPhil - Chat11:25, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And going back to 2008 The Scotsman newspaper wasn't very impressed about it either - see this. Both The Herald and The Scotsman are good papers, not tabloids or anything like that, so are generally pretty reliable/sensible. SagaciousPhil - Chat11:33, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Or is it called easter bouquet?
Well, only a general info needed. But easter trees in this case it is not a widespread thing, and not endemic for British Islands. Probably USA. I was looking for the branches. I think though we should write an article on those Easter branches, maybe DYK for Easter to come? Hafspajen (talk) 11:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Working on this translation. Want to ask you a thing, so I get it right. This Osterfeuer (Easter bonfires - ) are they comparable with the Walpurgis Night bonfires in size and how do they work? Also, this guy with the many Easter-eggs on his tree, does he leaving the on all year ? Or he tooks it of and puts it back? Hafspajen (talk) 18:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some (rather few) villages collect wood on a pile and burn it in the Night before Easter Sunday. I haven't been to any ;) - Tree: it's a family and they have them only for Easter. As the article says: they begin "roughly four weeks before Easter. In 2009 it took them nine days to decorate the tree; the task involved family members, especially Volker Kraft, his wife Christa, and daughter Gabriela Rumrich. They use ladders to reach the heights of the tree, and hang the eggs working from the inside near the trunk to outside of the tree branches, and from top to bottom. They remove the eggs before the leaves grow to prevent damage to the tree.[6]" (This year they may have had a problem because the leaves were out before Easter.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Let me stay polite ;) - Talk to the editor, about cryptic edit summaries, an explanation (I don't know the mentioned IPC - in popular culture - essay, policy or what), about removal of sourced content. We will meet there, I have my own topic, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't post messages to banned users' redirected talk pages
Please don't do something like this again. The fact that a user's entire talk page has been redirected to a user page bearing a ban notice should be a very strong hint that chatting with them is not a cool thing to do. — Scott•talk15:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the Precious/awesome Wikipedian/PumpkinSky Prize. I was rather busy today and didn't get a chance to log in until now. It was a pleasant surprise to find your message. It's good to know that once in a while somebody notices my contributions . I looked through the previous recipents and I feel honored to be listed among so many editors whom I respect. What a great way to start my weekend! Mojoworker (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like they are trying to distract from HiLo's incivility by attacking you and baiting you into more responses. It may be best to let go and move on to something else for now. Let them have the last word. After all, they thrive on drama; let them have the stage. They see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. Viriditas (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I said what I had to say: death is fact, other issues should be in perspective. I wrote several hymns, all on DYK, much more provoking content, - but in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! What do you think of the following: we reduce the rose part in the cathedral, make the rose a different article (the red-linked name looks good to me, "Thousand"!), I suggest a hook for the cathedral not mentioning the rose, and you take your time and nominate the rose separately when it feels right??? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:48, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My experience: people will not click two articles in a hook, bold or not,- extra links are only good for explanation of unknown terms. But as you prefer, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I mean two hooks, separate hooks. They don't need to be on same day, just connected. Can't we add... this will be continued next day.. or something? It would be fun to do a hook like that.
So we mean exactly the same: one for the cathedral (without rose, there are many other things, one on the rose, mentioning the cathedral, independent dates. Didn't I say that above ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem, ahem
I think this rose-thing is getting in shape. Aren't they some kind of dubble nominations? Like two articles getting nominated as a pair. Gerda, have you ever seen this rose in bloom? And if you did, can you chose two flower pictures that are approximatively about ther same like the ones on this rose? Hafspajen (talk) 14:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You CAN double nominate (or even more), but - to my experience - it's not good for the single article, people click only one, - if you have the cathedral and the rose in one hook, you will have the cathedral pictured and clicked, - not the rose. But as you like ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
forgot to answer your question: no, sorry, I haven't seen it, blooming or not. I have little time today, just peeking in from time to time, managed one rescue, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Order: you do rose and move it to Main space when it's ready, I take care of cathedral (needs refs) and word a different hook. Look at red link in Cathedral article for rose, looks good to me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I hadn't seen this discussion earlier - my internet connection problems meant I hadn't really been checking around! Hafs, I agree with Gerda - DYK reviewers seem to avoid double nominations, especially if the articles are longer than the basic 1500-2000 characters, probably because they all seem to be in too much of a hurry. If you want to do a single nomination for the Rose, you would also be able to include an image with it to see if it might get the lead spot when promoted? Let me know exactly what article title you want the draft moved to, please. "Thousand-year Rose" "Rose of Hildesheim" "Hildesheim Rose" "Thousand-year Rose, Hildesheim" I just wonder if it is only "Thousand-year Rose" if someone will then come along and re-direct it to something else? Personally, I hate re-directs! Gerda - if you have any suggestions or comments on things for the Rose article, I'd be very grateful for any advice. SagaciousPhil - Chat12:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The possibility of a rose image is a good point. "Thousand-year Rose" - shouldn't that be "Thousand-years Rose"? (don't see any source for that name, singular or plural.) Also used: "1000-year-old rosebush" What do the sources offer? "1000 years of age rosetree" seems a too literal translation. "1000-year-old rose" is not a readable title. Anything else? You know the sources better. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no double DYK. I don't know about the rose name. The Thousand year rose can give us problem in 500 years, and some guy now will surely start jumping up and down - you don't KNOW for sure that is a Thousand-year Rose, because it is not QUITE sure. And so on. Hafspajen (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's what I mean. So - providing Gerda agrees - it would leave "Rose of Hildesheim" or "Hildesheim Rose" ... unless ther are any other suggestions? SagaciousPhil - Chat12:25, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's called "Tausendjährig" in German, - you can choose from a translation and whatever name seems best in English sources. don't invent a name that will not be "common", - cathedral getting closer. Should Rose nom cover destruction or, cathedral? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:48, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"During this time he was also significant employee at the Württembergisches Choralbuch." can you check, significant employee is vague and I'm not sure it is correct.♦ Dr. Blofeld10:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the vote of confidence. I still write some articles, but I have also worked on many other things, including some Wikivoyage material. Bill Pollard (talk) 12:17, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the lovely note and I am sorry for my slow response: I'm a bit snowed under. I will try to have a look at Baroque instruments but I am not sure I am equal to the job!
You realize I'm going to have to go off and listen to 172 now, don't you? Thank you! :)
In other news, (a) have you seen The Grand Budapest Hotel? It claims to have been inspired by Zweig. We enjoyed it! and (b) just to boast, my brass band was playing outside St Paul's Cathedral yesterday for the women priests 20Y thing - it was fantastic!
Erm - NO strings?? I am worried that I have missed the point here. I'm just listening and it's v nice but I hear fiddles. (Suzuki vol. 7) Please enlighten me DBaK (talk) 19:01, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lucky you! What a gorgeous piece, eh? With a mixture of shame and delight I admit I didn't know it - which is terrible, but great! I've listened to it a LOT since last night. Did you hear AS on R3 the other night? He was great and they played some stuff in which he sang low - which was a surprise, and worked pretty well. I'd still rather he stayed Up There but this was interesting to hear too. DBaK (talk) 09:18, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I honestly don't know what to say. I guess I'll be unoriginal this time and say what people probably always say: Aww shucks. You made my day. I will repay WikiLove with WikiLove. Thank you for being so kind, and may you keep doing what you do! See you around, Mz7 (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, even if "random" doesn't quite match a daily thing, - but yes, I try to keep doing what I do, singing the praises of the gnomes and the banned ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is wrong, but I will be kind (see above) and not fight. - Going through this again: I was born in Germany, even if you would say West Germany and perhaps claim you know better. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:14, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I won't go into the history as we all know it, but as far as Wikipedia is concerned there were two countries between 1949 and 1990, East Germany and West Germany, which formed a united nation in 1990. You may not like it, but that's the facts. GiantSnowman09:19, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fact is that Wikipedia seems to regard that as a fact. It is a simplified way to deal with complicated political matters. However, a place (!) of birth doesn't need to specify a political state, simply the location. I was born in Germany. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We state [city], [province/state - some times] and [country]. You were born in West Germany or East Germany; 'Germany' did not exist until 1990. GiantSnowman09:55, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to intervene... I will have to agree with GiantSnowman. "FR Germany (1949–1990)" (commonly referred to as "West Germany") is a former country (just like South Vietnam or SR Croatia). I have been reverted once by you, Gerda, for including the term "West Germany" in an infobox. The fact is that, according to common Wikipedia practice, infoboxes should reflect the contemporary political status of someone's place of birth or death—this is an almost universally accepted convention. This piece of information is relevant as it may tell (and most of the times it does tell) something about the historical context in which a person lived and acted—not to mention matters of historical accuracy. –Omnipaedista (talk) 11:42, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see it differently, but have limited time to explain: where someone is born may be sheer coincidence, see Max van Egmond, it's a geographic place. The terms of historical context would be better covered by |citizenship= if needed, and should say "FR" rather than "West". My 2 cts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The BRD/DDR was a temporary historic anomaly imposed and sustained largely by outside powers; the nation itself never consented to the split; this distinguishes Germany from many other places that had shifting borders. I think that a person who was born, educated, and lives in a country does know better where they are born than someone who does not fit those parameters. We don't list people born in occupied France in 1942 as born in Vichy France. I also consider it a gesture of respect to allow people to define their own national identity and heal historic wounds. Montanabw(talk)22:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What a sad discussion, indeed. I remember well that I used to write "West Germany" on the letters and postcards I sent to Britain. But the fall of the Berlin wall happened in 1989. It is true that we still refer to people as being of East or West German descent in this country, but not in order to indicate nationality. As far as the biographies of living persons are concerned, we no longer stress that someone's place of birth was situated in either East or West Germany. So, in the case of Michael Wesely, we simply say that he is a German artist. Period. It is of little importance that he was born in Munich. He now lives in Berlin which is really important for his work. And he works abroad, as you can see from his series of images taken at the MoMA. — But apart from that, I have reverted User:Montanabw because I think that an artists place of birth and residency should be mentioned in the introduction to an article. I rather like it this way, and I gather that the manual of style is disputed in so far.--Aschmidt (talk) 22:48, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, thanks for the link, Gerda. Welcome to Wikipedia... the same as next door... been there, seen that... =8-| --Aschmidt (talk) 23:14, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) "I also consider it a gesture of respect to allow people to define their own national identity and heal historic wounds." No one denied that; no one denied that a French person born in French Algeria is a French national if they define themselves as such. We do not even talk about ethnicities/nationalities here. All I am saying is that there exist certain facts: for example the Czech Republic did not exist before 1969, R Macedonia did not exist before 1943, Ukraine (as a state) did not exist before 1917, Austria was the Federal State of Austria in 1934–1938, etc. A kind of anachronistic and revisionist thinking about history could lead to immense confusion. It would be absurd to list Alfred Jaëll's place of birth as "Trieste, Italy" and his nationality as "Austrian". It is a matter of principle to acknowledge the historical facts. Lastly, I note that the whole discussion about the appropriateness of using the "BRD/DDR" terminology has to take into consideration common English usage and the academic consensus (as per WP:CCPOL). --Omnipaedista (talk) 06:36, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you can tell me why to add "Germany" to "Munich" at all (or more generally: a country to any other well-known or linked city), and why, IF we have to, you would specify a sloppy term (agreed: common usage, but still hurtful for someone who suffered from the separation, and perhaps Wikipedia could think about that eventually) to an unpolitical artist. I would sort of understand it for sports-people representing one or the other part of Germany, and for politicians, but even then I think "nationality" and "citizenship" would be the more appropriate parameters for political and historic context than the geography place of birth. My choice would be simply Munich: that article has the history.
The answer is obvious. You could not assume that the reader is knowledgeable about such intricacies (to know, for example, that someone could have been born and lived in Trieste in the 19th century and be an Austrian, not an Italian national/citizen). There is a policy (Wikipedia:SUMMARY#References) according to which "each article on Wikipedia must be able to stand alone as a self-contained unit" (true, that policy was not meant to cover the topic we are talking about here, but I believe it does cover it in a way). This means that demanding that a reader should click on a city's wikilink and track down that city's history to figure out its past status, is a bad practice in general. A common and good practice is to include something like "Trieste, Austrian Empire (now Italy)" in the infobox/metadata and give a brief explanation in the body of the article if needed (e.g., as is done in the article about Arthur Schopenhauer: "Arthur Schopenhauer was born on 22 February 1788 in the city of Danzig, on Heiligegeistgasse (known in the present day as Św. Ducha 47) ... At the time Danzig became part of Prussia in 1793"). Yes, I do take into consideration how sensitive are matters that have to do with 20th century European history, since many people are still affected by the aftermath of certain tragic events. What I propose is that we should either find a way to deal with the vital data in biographies consistently and wikiwide and allow no exceptions or to allow some exceptions, but only after we have reached a clear consensus on which cases are to be excluded from the general rule of respecting historical contingencies. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict, and I don't remember where exactly) I talked about the infobox, not the lead. There, I don't feel we need to add anything to the linked city. Most readers will know where that is, the others can look it up. - If some article subject represented East Germany in sports or politics, that will show in other parameters, - keep simple. For the photographer in question, it seems not to play a role for his career that his place of birth was in West Germany when he happened to be born, - if it doesn't matter, why and for whom would you add it? (On top of this, it is not referenced in the article, a strong contradiction to the "stand-alone".) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
After edit conflict: I don't think we speak about the same thing. I am not against explaining historic facts where they matter. I worked on Kafka, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see. In the final analysis, the historical status of a city is something "permanent" (e.g., Danzig was Prussian in 1793–1807 and 1814–1871 and that piece of information can hardly be revised); what is "derivative" is the present-day affiliations of a city. So, our disagreement may be in that in my view we have to assume that historical facts always matter by default and should normally be included both in the body of the article and the infobox/persondata parameters (this is still common Wikipedia practice), and that making arbitrary exceptions might lead to unnecessary disputes. But I have already made a compromising proposal for handling this disagreement: making exceptions only when there is a consensus that exceptions are due (possible exceptions may include facts related to the History of Germany (1945–90) or the Baltic states under Soviet rule (1944–91)). I am also planning to make a proposal to modify WP:OPENPARA. --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:02, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, for explaining and the planned proposal. I don't disagree that a historic status of a city is something permanent, only don't see a reason to include that status where it doesn't matter to the article, - it seems distracting. I don't need any "Germany" for Munich. - Kafka, a German-speaking citizen of first the Habsburg monarchy and then a Czech republique, is a different story where it matters. I remember those discussions on citizenship. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We both know where Munich is but it is too much of an assumption to make that all our readers know that as well—I am still talking about what the best wikiwide rule would be. Not all German-language place names indicate places that are part of Germany. Neither all places currently part of Germany, France, and Italy were always part of those countries. So, sometimes it is not only a matter of different political regime (Kingdom, Dictatorship, Republic, etc.) but also a matter of different political/ethnic geography. Sure, a distinction that could be made is that the country should be included in the infobox only when "ambiguities" arise or when a city is not well-known; but I still think that this is an arbitrary distinction which does not help an editor make a decision (Should I include "Germany" after Ladenburg or not? How about including "Switzerland" after Wahlern? How about someone who was born in Geneva right after the French invasion of Switzerland or someone born in Saarbrücken while the city was part of the French Saar Protectorate?). Sorry to have digressed from the original topic; I am just pointing out how complex can things get. --Omnipaedista (talk) 11:19, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would not be against adding "Germany" to Munich, or "Switzerland" to Wahlern, even if hovering over the linked article (or a click if you can't do that) would tell you if (!) you want to know. We were told not to clutter and to avoid repetition. The political status of a place, a place which may be of little relevance to a biography, seems to be repetitive to nationality and/or citizenship. The addition of "West" to Germany distracts attention further, away from the photographer and his work to the political status at the time of his birth, of a place that seems of no relevance to his bio. - What - if you still think you need it - would you think of a piped link Germany? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would certainly be content with a piped link. The only possible objection one could have would be to note that piped links of this kind are in violation of WP:EGG. But I would disagree with that; if a country such as the German Empire is commonly referred to as 'Germany' then I see no reason why the formula '[[German Empire|Germany]]' constitutes an easter egg. I guess the same more or less applies to '[[West Germany|Germany]]'. --Omnipaedista (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be about the opposite of an Easter egg, because it has more precision than a link to simply Germany would carry. I debate with myself if in Bach composition articles, I should replace links to Weimar to something like Weimar (Bach), or the paragraph about Weimar in Bach's bio, instead of today's Weimar. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree that a piped link of the kind I mentioned above carries more precision and less ambiguity. However, I have some reservations about a piped link like Weimar (Bach). For all practical purposes, Weimar of Bach's time is the same entity as present-day Weimar. Moreover, it would be a somewhat peculiar practice to link to a bio (even if a bio includes a relevant section) instead of linking to the article about the city. --Omnipaedista (talk) 12:27, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Weimar (Bach)" and (more important) "Leipzig (Bach)" would be an article about the place and circumstances (locations, politics) in which he composed, relevant to hundreds of articles, possibly more meaningful than today's towns. However, I have no time for such dreams, I need to ask permission and discuss for every article before I improve my own references, or how would you interpret this? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, articles such as "Weimar (Bach)" do not currently exist in Wikipedia. Broad consensus would be a prerequisite before they could be created. Regarding the other topic: "If you are the first contributor to add citations to an article, you may choose whichever style you think best for the article" (per WP:CITEVAR). Sure, Nikkimaria made a couple of edits to the article but you still are the first and major contributor. –Omnipaedista (talk) 13:24, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Message
I will clean up Edda Görings article in a few minutes with intention of getting GA status, I would appreciate your review at that time. Kind regards. Jonas Vinther (talk) 15:48, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! As English is not my first language, I avoid GA reviews - where I would be the only reviewer - but participate in FA reviews ;) - I like infoboxes, as you will know ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda: I just have to say, I wish every editor on Wiki were like you! I've run into a rough patch lately with people being very cranky and forgetting all about AGF. It's at times like that I pull out the sapphire you gave me, take a deep breath and remember "the project... the project...." not the personalities! Thank you again for the award and the WikiLove. Cheers!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do the same. Look at today's, found this, inspiring: "I've not lost perspective, though, Wiki is not flawed beyond hope, it's just a long way from being perfect. That's nothing to be ashamed of, it's an opportunity for good people to take responsibility and improve things." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ec, you said the same:) You can find it in the history ;) - Seriously: I have one archive per year, to see discussions in context. Many images on one topic don't help context, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That paper on the head is verses from the Torah. Modern practice is little boxes called Tefillin (The first picture is taken from a photograph of me on washing day, the middle picture is me - pre-nose and boob job - caught in a hurricane) Belle (talk) 10:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also Hafspajen, I've totally stolen your idea and quickly (partially) translated the French article on Clairin. Please feel free to steal my translation in revenge (I don't even know if original translation from other Wikipedias is allowed) Belle (talk) 10:38, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
GFHandel means me and choral cantatas: "The degradation of article content mainly due to the poorly-worded additions of the uninformed." (stop nodding, it's meant to be a joke)Belle (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I confess to be unhappy about the move from the original name to the English translation. How is that a common name? For decades, the Dutch name was the only one, now it's the name that distinguishes the group from many other Bach societies, most sources have it, also the German Wikipedia, for a reason, - can't we be international and historical here also? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Netherlands Bach Society is the name the ensemble itself uses internationally (see http://allofbach.com/en/). All current English sources also use the English name, as far as I can establish. Your edit to the article makes clear that the ensemble was founded as De Nederlandse Bachvereniging. That the German Wikipedia uses the Dutch name is understandable, as the ensemble itself does not use a German name. Buxtehude (talk) 17:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I'm not too sure about that ... parentheses are generally used for disambiguation, and there's nothing to disambiguate in this case. Graham8709:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The question came up in the FAC for BWV 172. People wished an article about church cantata, instead of linking to Bach cantata. That is not written (yet), but the more specific one - to which I would even prefer to link - is there. Bach was not the only one to write church cantatas. If we call it Bach church cantata we will have the same discussion as on Bach cantata, and with more justification, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Gerda Arendt, for your very kind words on my talk page.
Yesterday I was reading with interest about the cathedral in Hildesheim, and was amazed at the story of its legendary 1,000-year-old rose bush. [27] Perhaps that would make a DYK nomination? Sca (talk) 13:29, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My sister in Colorado was worried about her roses due to a late-spring snowstorm, so yesterday I sent her a link to Thousand-year Rose and said, "I think there's hope for your roses." A pic she took of one of them a couple years ago can be seen here. [28]Sca (talk) 14:31, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That one, I say is a Peace rose, and if the snowstorm comes just put a common paperbag ower them, Sca and they will be just fine. Tea-roses are a bit delicate, but it worth growing them since they are so gorgious. Hafspajen (talk) 17:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda sells her contribution short! Glad that you enjoyed the article and glad to have been part of bringing it to you! I hope the wilted roses regrew. Furius (talk) 20:36, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I'm afraid I don't know the work in question - what exactly is going on with the tense here? Is the book about events following an engagement that occurs before the start of the story? I'd have thought that would still fall under WP:TENSE (or that it should, at the least, be rewritten to avoid mixing present and past tense). --McGeddon (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"It deals with the troubled relationship of a son and his dominant father, facing a new situation after the son became engaged." I may be wrong but understand that even if the story is told in the present tense, the fact that changed before should be in the past tense. That's not mixing but stressing the sequence of events, no? There's an article on the story. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would go for either "after the son gets engaged" or if I really wanted to stress posteriority "after the son has gotten engaged". Furius (talk) 23:16, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There really should be a "reply to thanks" button, to spare me the effort of typing as I'm winding down for my holiday now (from my oh-so-difficult daily life). My musical idiocy again came into play with the organ, I'd no idea what a manual was - thankfully there's an online encyclopaedia called Wikipedia that told me it's the keyboard. Amazing. Belle (talk) 16:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is almost ready. User:Hafspajen/Remember... Bur remember, when clear, you post it... OK, I need help. Because this reviewing makes me desperate. Template:Did you know nominations/Biertan fortified church, Câlnic Citadel, Dârjiu fortified church, Prejmer fortified church, Saschiz fortified church, Valea Viilor fortified church, Viscri fortified church it is abourt thr German Saxons in Transylvania. But I am pretty nervous to give a green tick. Mainly because of the scandals with the DYKs lately, and I am not too knowledgeable about about DYK or the the content. Could you please step in as a co-reviewer, or single, I need help. Looks interesting, but makes me nervous, the hook, too-please...
Do you realise that they are seven articles to check? And people were making a lot of fuss about my refs, noew I am using thee monkey, .<ref>{{cite web|url=|title=|publisher=|accessdate=}}</ref> but this I don't know anything about.
<ref>[http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/596 Villages with Fortified Churches in Transylvania] at the UNESCO site</ref>
Isn't this the bare URL people cry about? And Sagaciousphil is not here nowadays.. looks like it. Sca? Any interest in this? Feels like it would need more the one person, maybe two, three, four..
Hafspajen (talk) 15:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I told you what to do, no? (and that I have little time for this, - you can request another reviewer by using the red icon, you would still have done your review). Remember: not even two articles in one hook, let alone seven! and not such a boring hook! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. Thank you. I did the rev. for only one church, Biertan, and I said that I think it should be split. But if he wants that giant hook with severn churches.. How am I supposed to show that I do not agree with hook with the 7 churches? Hafspajen (talk) 17:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's all fine. When I wrote the above I had not seen how determined they are. You did what you could, count that as a review - it is one - and mark with the red icon that more is needed, and nobody can expect you to do seven. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I didn't realize what a scandal I'd provoked. Sorry about that.
As for Neunkirchen, I came to this via philately. During the League of Nations mandate, Saar issued a number of series of semi-postal stamps that are quite expensive today, including one to raise funds for the disaster victims. Then, of course, there's the fact that such a deadly explosion usually gets included in an encyclopedia. So if you find the time and inclination, I think it would make for a nice (but sobering) article. - BiruitorulTalk19:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No scandal, no need to be sorry ;) (But may be I don't understand "scandal".) - Just our taste for a hook is different, and yours is nothing compared to that on all the provinces of Burkina Faso (some two-digit number, it didn't make it, and would have been extremely boring.) - I don't have extra time right now, too many of my own plans that I don't get to.. What do you think of proposing on project Germany? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No God needed for simple learning: green is for all online citations your language, the other is an approval for all kinds of AGF, offline or a language you don't know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's never too late for courage ;) - unless you die. Two women died recently, otherwise it's mostly men who don't have enough courage to stay, see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda. I'd like you to withdraw this. While the hook can be referenced, there are a lot of sources in the article which have no page numbers, and many of them (most in fact) are referenced to original letters and documents in the UK National Archives and not as precisely referenced as they should be. Technically each letter quoted should be referenced separately rather than lumped together. e.g. "Letters to and from Trevor Corry to the Secretary of State for the Northern Department, Thomas Thynne, 3rd Viscount Weymouth. Secretaries of State: State Papers Foreign, Poland. The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey". There's no way this can be fixed in the timescale of DYK. Some might even start screaming "original research". Two other refs (one of which is used multiple times) are too imprecise to verify and are marked as such. Given the current atmosphere at DYK, the article is liable to be pulled to shreds. It's the first contribution by a brand new editor, who's still finding his way around Wikipedia. He potentially has a lot to offer, and I'm hoping I can encourage him to become a regular contributor here. See [29]. Frankly, I think this has the potential to be a very confusing and demoralising experience for him. It's up to you, but I hope you'll understand my reasoning. If you do go ahead with it (and I hope you won't), my name should not be credited. I merely did mechanical work on it and a few minor additions. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hellow how are you?.. Thank you for stopping the attacking than done by user:Ich Pilot here here, user:Ich Pilot had made many of new Contributions, which are not based on sources or selecting the sources that are compatible with his couches, I asked him (user:Ich Pilot) to discussed before making any changes to find a common solution (especially that there are many different Statistics which gives different data), Maps here about percentages of Christians around the world (and he have put percentages of Christians in Western countries without sources) and I brought a variety of sources in order to debate, and I asked him to debate before doing any modification until we get to the result of inappropriate but he refuses to debate and even attack me as ([i know all christians are supposed to lie according to their religion] and here here. here is example for one of his personal attacks: by user:B88attack my personal page and putting pictures calling me fascists and another picture as: If Jesus return kill him again!. he still doing Personal attack directed for me: using low level of word, using low level of word in my Arabic page which called Christians a Monkey!!! here you can also see some of assaults on multiple articles as here, and here
Have you seen the lavishly illustrated Gotik book, ed'd by Rolf Toman? [30] I think you'd find it interesting. (I have the English trans.) Sca (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, you are one of the very few people who have reached this milestone. Thank you for your tireless contributions to Wikipedia and the DYK project! -Zanhe (talk) 06:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination of Komm, Heiliger Geist, Herre Gott
I see you noticed my edit to Gottfried Heinrich Stölzel. I was listening to a recording by Hoffmann, and realized I didn't know anything about him. Come to find out, neither does Wikipedia (ok, Wikipedia knows a *little* about him). He wrote a Magnificat that was misattributed to J.S. Bach for most of the 19th-century (as BWV Anh. 21) if the liner notes of the CD (Pro-Arte CDD 185) are to be believed. Wikipedia doesn't mention this mis-attribution anywhere, either. Does researching this further appeal to you at all? If so, I'd love to collaborate with you on it (the composer and/or the work). Wishing you all the best! 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 13:57, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It appeals, but I have to deal with a few other things first, see above ;) - "Bist du bei mir" not being by Bach but by Stölzel was one of the things I helped cleaning up, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:15, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks, and I perfectly understand. I'm going to create a stub on Hoffmann. If it pleases you to use your touch and turn it into something beautiful later, that would be wonderful. An article on the composition mistaken for Bach's, at a later point, will await your (or someone else's) imagination. All the best, and thank you again. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 16:09, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have been clearing out the dross in my googlemail account...
Hi, all I was saying was that we have to list the same DYK review criteria for all nominated articles. "New enough" and "sourcing checked by GA reviewer" are not enough. There's also "long enough", "at least 1 inline cite per paragraph", "no close paraphrasing", "hook ref verified and cited inline", and "QPQ done". GA and DYK reviews are not the same; we recently found close paraphrasing in a different GA nom. Best, Yoninah (talk) 21:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please compare my other reviews (40+ this year on my user page), for example this: I say what's missing (almost always, very few pass without such a comment) but not everything that's there. Now I could go and copy the above to the review, - would that really change anything? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've just been noticing lately that BlueMoonset and others are asking for more detailed reviews so we know that everything's checked. I know it's a hassle, but it's a one-line formula that I can rattle off in my sleep: New enough, long enough, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen, hook ref verified and cited inline, QPQ done. Good to go.Yoninah (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Come, Holey Ghost, God and Lord, av Catherine Winkworth. It say about the same thing, but does not take up the German and the English variations. But Swedish are not that interested in such things. Hafspajen (talk) 18:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The "Psalm" (hymn) was translated to Swedish in 1567 (no author given) and was revamped 1816 by Johan Olof Wallin. It was reworked again 1983 by Britt G. Hallqvist for the Den svenska psalmboken 1986. (The Swedish hymnal from 1986)
The words from 1695 are (in translation):
Kom Helge Ande Herre Gudh
Upfyll medh tine nåde godh
The Christtrognas hierta hugh och siil;(this is really old Swedish...)
I like you checking, and the result, - have time til Pentecost to add ;) - you are an angel, dyk? Sad that PumpkinSky doesn't hand out Angel barnstars any more, you deserve one! "my joy" will hopefully be on the Main page, later today, but I'm off for now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I took some of the Swedish info to the article, which now has two red links, in both cases not the only red link here, hint, hint ;) - in other words: create a stub of two or three lines, if you have the time, simply to make the connection from those other articles, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I can imagine a bit. He is what they call "topic banned", and blocked temporarily, perhaps you could change your comment, others might misunderstand. One comment was "Shooting you would have been kinder". I added him in the sad listing on top of this page, could add two more of today, - such a waste of talent. The first time a lost a friend here I screamed. If I kept doing that it would be very noisy. I bring flowers now. - Can I do anything for you? I am topic banned myself but not for South Asia. You could also ask questions his talk, he can edit there, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What an unexpected pleasure
Thank you! (I'm glad I've been able to impact upon you positively.)
Sadly, my internet connection must feel neglected - it is avoiding me at the moment and making editing a painful experience. I'll get back to you when the data packets are flowing more freely. Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Flowing more freely", what a wonderful way to describe what others would call a lousy connection! With you, hoping for more free flow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:55, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kindly for the award and for all your support during the review. The numbers are encouraging, and the good thing is that there are plenty more to be mined if we so choose - those seven are but the tip of the iceberg! Only this time, I think I'd do them one by one. - BiruitorulTalk14:03, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the Awesome Wikipedian comment on my talk page. I really appreciate it. Sorry I didn't say thank you sooner, even when Thomas Ellison was at TFA I was too busy to edit. Thanks again! -- Shuddetalk09:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cantiones sacrae you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
BWV 37
You're very welcome. It can be hard to figure out where someone is coming from sometimes, and I don't understand the problem at all since it doesn't affect the display as far as I can see.
I hope you won't take offense at any of my suggestions in the next section - they were all intended to be helpful in further editing, but looking back now I see that my tone comes across as pretty abrupt. Let me know if you're not familiar with the final joke there, or have trouble deciphering it. WP has an article, but it's expressed differently; this is the way I learned it many years ago. Milkunderwood (talk) 03:36, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No offense, no, content questions are always welcome! I just was too tired to answer when I returned from an unplanned trip, - no internet, a blessing, - I should do that more often. I will get to your questions after the morning routine: finding someone Precious. You can already look at the coding of |chorale= and see that it is actually two entries for two chorales, and I would be grateful for a way to clarify that. I had added the movement number in brackets, - that was not wanted. - Looking forward to the joke, I didn't read all, really too tired. Happy Ascension Day (for which the cantata was written)! We (the choir pictured in my user's infobox) sang the opening movement this year, - it's so general that it can be used any day. Same for the opening of BWV 172, - comments/improvements to that article welcome (including a recent revision), before it will go to Main page for Pentecost. Be bold! Change without asking if it helps, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's an idea, we will discuss now ad see what teh authorities think ;) - my "routine", including watchlist, breakfast and actually going to church, took a little longer than I assumed. - I believe in the magic of AGF, strongly so, otherwise see above, look for "to romantic", - I am not too romantic ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:15, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cantiones sacrae
The ever-helpful bot will probably get in here before I do, but speaking as a human being I send my congratulations, dear Gerda, on the deserved promotion of this article. Forgive me if I don't review your current Bach GAN contributions, but having worked with you on Handel I don't feel comfortable about reviewing something so close to what we've collaborated on. I hope your unexpected trip was satisfactory. Tim riley talk21:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Recalled again here among others: "Gerda Arendt is indefinitely restricted from: adding or deleting infoboxes; restoring an infobox that has been deleted; or making more than two comments in discussing the inclusion or exclusion of an infobox on a given article. They may participate in wider policy discussions regarding infoboxes with no restriction, and include infoboxes in new articles which they create." Note that a) "create" means something different than "major contributor", and b) "making more than two comments in discussing the inclusion or exclusion of an infobox on a given article" is broader than simply "making more than two comments in a particular discussion". The first restriction you have clearly violated several times, most recently today; the last you have likely violated on multiple occasions. A final plea: unless/until your restrictions are amended or removed, stick to them strictly. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're allowed two comments? I'm not allowed to take part in any discussion on RfA, or to make any comments that might be perceived to be critical of the admin system. What a fucking joke. EricCorbett06:36, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Ask for the same mercy, you can give me as an example. - Did you read Chopin? Good questions asked, for example about the myth "policy of Wikipedia:WikiProject Composers". which some believe exists. No WikiProject writes policy. Some day I would like to understand how these believers win arbcom to protect their myth, instead of "An infobox may be used to improve the appearance of an article on Wikipedia" (quoted from our own article, which doesn't have an infobox, - what a [stalking reader: insert descriptor to your liking] joke.) Look above and go to battle, on Blues dance, Adeney and elsewhere, if you are are so inclined, - I am not. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Eric, it's different; you attract both trolls and drama queens~~ by the railcar load. Gerda just has to deal with one tendentious user with a personal vendetta and rules obsession who wants her run off of wiki. Sad, really. Montanabw(talk)20:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In different words, yes. See above, collapsed "blushing", and in my four-year-old user's infobox ;) - thank you, I try the understanding also, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, cangratulations on the above DYK - well deserved!
And thank you very much for your moral support in my church building article - much appreciated. However, frankly, I think there are times when article-creators have to quickly withdraw a nom to protect the article from major interference. While Bencherlite was right to draw attention to shortcomings in the article, and there would have been time to do a big re-edit as you say, the article was at risk of huge summary deletions and section-blankings from well-intentioned editors in the short term, so long as the nom was in progress.
This is an important article as (in my opinion) the church building is currently at risk of structural neglect and damage from certain people and agendas. So the building is up for listing for its own protection, and the public information needs to be available. To keep it in line with WP, yes it does need urgent re-editing and more research, but I am currently stretched between that job and helping to clear the DYK review backlog, which is equally important - because there are plenty of other articles out there which deserve exposure on the front page for all sorts of valid reasons.
If you would really like to support my work on this article, I'd love it if you could please watch it and help protect it from well-meaning content-deletions. It's already suffered the removal of all mention of one of the curate's wives. Anglican priests and their wives have always been equally important in parish teamwork, the wife almost always doing full-time and valid but unpaid and uncredited parish work. In 19th century news articles about local church matters, it's significant that parishioners always give equal gifts, praise and thanks to both the priest and his wife when they retire or move on to the next church. So to remove the curate's wife from the article is a non-neutral, sexist, outdated and (if you like) anti-feminist action - though I accept that the deleter may be from another culture and may not be aware of the curate's wife's importance.
My apologies for such a long message. Meanwhile, please let me know if there's anything I can do in return, e.g. if you spot a languishing DYK nom which needs extra support. Cheers. --Storye book (talk) 08:37, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the message, I understand better now. You did A LOT for me by rewiewing all those articles, and I thought the nom should have been kept open simplyt to show that. I am easy on DYK since a review of mine caused the "Easter scandal". I will watch your church, you can watch my baby BWV 172, my first "single" FA, as TFA on 8 June, when I will be busy, singing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Storye book, if you're going to call me or my editing "non-neutral, sexist, outdated and (if you like) anti-feminist", then at least have the decency to tell me to my face. Fortunately Gerda's talk page is on my watchlist. The subject of the article is the church. It is utterly irrelevant to an encyclopaedic article about the church that the widow of someone who served in the parish for two years died 41 years later at the age of 81 in Scarborough or that she was "semi-blind" 13 years after leaving the parish. BencherliteTalk10:09, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, hope you are well. Do you remember a few weeks ago when you suggested I start an article and then I stole Hafspajen's idea and the French article on Georges Clairin? It is still languishing on my subpage because (among other reasons) the French version had text in "citation bloc" templates. Do you know or any of your friends know what I should use as the equivalent here (I will obviously translate the text within it). Belle (talk) 11:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is it for quotations? {{quote}}, but should possibly kept original, with a translation added, in the quote. If the article is fine otherwise, I would move it, and polish while in article space, with the help of others who don't know your private area. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I'm giggling childishly at the thought that hopefully nobody on here knows my private area. So sorry. I'll try that tl|quote. Belle (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't seem like the documentation at {{Infobox NRHP}} gives any clue as to how to use it. That template was itself mostly copied from {{infobox protected area}}, which suggests "a city with a major airport or a large gateway town where supplies and lodging are available." But, obviously, that language makes more sense when we're talking about protected areas, not heritage register listings.
For NRHP I have used it to refer to the nearest municipality anywhere that is incorporated as a city, which is usually some place that people outside that region of the country will have heard of. So I chose Stamford, which is a city. However, distance-wise I'm not sure, now that you make me think about it, if White Plains (also a city) isn't just as close.
That said, I think using out-of-state cities in some cases makes sense (see Lace House (Canaan, New York), very near the MA state line and much closer to Pittsfield, Massachusetts, than any city in that part of New York.
Of course, what this whole discussion increasingly makes me think of is whether the NRHP infobox actually needs that parameter or not anymore, especially with the map functionality available. Daniel Case (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for thinking. Even if a template has a parameter, we don't have to fill it if it doesn't really help. I think it's meant to help people to get a feeling for where a place is, but they may know Armonk, IBM headquarter for a while, better than Stamford, CT. (And if CT, why not Greenwich?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I asked by what standards Weimar is a city, and said that you have to take a very liberal look at "castle" to think that this is one. When I read "castle" I understand "Burg". - You can never say "a City Castle", - if it's a general term, it would be "a city castle". "Stadtschloss" is a general term, not a specific name, describing that it is not in the countryside. The place has no name, we (not even the World Heritage people) should not invent one. I believe to stay with the original term is best, especially as there is an explaining article Schloss. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)I don't think that that site's use of City Castle adds any credibility to the term, which is not really an expression which works at all well in English. That the person who translated the website into English couldn't think of a proper term for it does not make it OK to use this expression. In other words, in that particular context, that particular bit of that page cannot be a WP:RS. I would back Gerda's judgement on this. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 13:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, really, I don't know, why don't you ask them? My guess is that they also are plagued by stupid literal-minded translation. But then what do I know? Nix. DBaK (talk) 18:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172
Congrats on the TFA! There are some harv errors, though, that you might want to fix. Refs 5, 6, & 24 are to an "Arnold 2009" that doesn't appear in the bibliography, and the "Maor 2009" in the bibliography doesn't appear to have been cited anywhere. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:40, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
*Pfft*—"cabal of women". As everyone knows, all you so-called "women" are really just a bunch of kiddie-porn collectors editing from your mothers' basements. Me, I'll be performing "Let it Go" in the shower tonight. Tickets are extremely hard to obtain. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your kind words and for all of the work you do regarding the Bach articles. Congrats on the FA of Erschallet! I'm very pleased to see a Bach cantata article get acknowledged as an FA!--FeanorStar7 15:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Because every fact in Wikipedia needs a good reliable source. If you had been a registered user, I would have come to your talk page, but I didn't know if you would find the one with the IP number. I suggest that you discuss the matter on the article's talk page where more people look than here in my corner. Please use the "New section" function, that will automatically place your topic at the bottom, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So, what is the connection between Strauss and Star Trek (TNG)? It's a good pub quiz question. Ermmmm, if you went to an odd pub, perhaps. :) DBaK (talk) 21:41, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Close but no cigar. It's a sort-of personal link, through a piece of music. And, indeed, a Next Generation! :) Sweet dreams DBaK (talk) 21:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! Annabel Breuer on the front page of the German Wikipedia! And at a great time too - the whole team takes to the courts for the World Championships next week. You're really special - you know that right? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:58, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! - The timing was coincidence, of course, you nominate and then wait for 4 to 6 weeks, - good news: once on the front page, it stays for 48 hours, 24 pictured, 24 without. Every article on de-WP has the statistic right at the bottom, called Abrufstatistik. I plan to start another translation today, for a missed user, as this before. Yes, I know that remembering the missed ones is special ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Beautiful image (memories of school homework), but no for two reasons: too foresty, - we need open meadow (translation), and no person, please, it's the perspective of a man on the way to his woman, none of them should be on in, to leave it timeless, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, better, thanks! I like that both grey and blue appear, as in the text. The ideal one is a painting from around 1900. The opposite of ideal is a nude - which I actually saw. I have the bird project today, but will add over the weekend, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
since it is about woman, I could think of a woman in the picture
Why isn't he comming??? (Joke...)
You are just amazing! I just nominated, so far with an image of the composer, saying that we are looking. The moon is not mentioned, the stars are, and the meadows. The woman is not described! (other than saying that she is the most beautiful), she should not be "on". I like the joke ;) - So far I would chose the shepherd. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:44, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda. I just spotted this nom which needed your help 18 days ago, but the reviewer forgot to alert you, and you probably missed it, so I forwarded the alert today. --Storye book (talk) 15:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was only the nominator, and would not know without research where to find the citations. Ask the translator? Consider that it would be fine with just the surced material? - The typical translation from German, - no inline citations, just books without page numbers ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can you, Nightscream, please look around before you ask?
Yes, and I have, and indeed, I refrained from notifying an number of editors, inlcluding one who also had block notices on his/her talk page. But I'm not perfect. Sometimes I miss things. It happens. Peace. Nightscream (talk) 23:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I'll do what I can, but I've been without the internet for nearly a week now, editing now through a friend's mobile phone plugged into my PC, but that link will only be available over the weekend. I think it may be a few more days until my phone line is sorted Jimfbleak - talk to me?16:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No hurry, it will take a few weeks for it to mature ;) - Look for your name on my German user page! - Today's project (images above) has the line "Ich gehe nicht schnell, ich eile nicht", a good motto: I don't go fast, I don't rush" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Put your edit in a text file before pressing save; I didnt realise you were still editing, and might have edit conflicted you. Ceoil (talk) 22:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just ran across this template gallery for welcome messages and thought of you. The first time I wanted an infobox for an article, I had a terrible time finding one. Imagine if there was a gallery like this for infoboxes, how easy it that would make it for the users. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 03:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but you can't see what they look like. And how would someone who needed an infobox ever find that list? If you type in Wikipedia:Infobox it takes you to a wikiproject that I'm sorry to say doesn't look very active. Not a good start for someone who wants to learn about infoboxes or even just pick one quickly. It seems you would need hours of research to figure it out, something the average editor isn't really able to do. —Neotarf (talk) 08:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I don't get the question? You click on a template and get to the documentation, showing you what it looks like, with examples, you can see further what links there and get to active inclusions, - what else do you need? Please ask the project if it's not enough, I am really not the one who could help you, perhaps Andy or Frietjes, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:32, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're the one who cares about the infoboxes. And you know who all the infobox people are.
Okay, case number one: You want to put a welcome notice on someone's talk page but you don't know anything about it. And you don't like some of the notices you have seen. Maybe the user doesn't speak English very well, and needs one that is easy to understand. So you want to see what the notices look like and pick out one that is appropriate to the user. So you type in "welcome templates" and you get a page with a list of welcome templates. Another click and you can see what they all look like, just by scrolling down the page. You have just reached a page that shows all the templates together on one page and with only two keyclicks and two pageloads. And you reached that page by typing in a search word that inexperienced users might type. And all you have to do is select the one that looks like what you want, type in the code that's next to it on the user's talk page, and presto! they have a welcome message.
Case number two. You want an infobox, but you don't know anything about it and you want to know how it would look on your article. So you type "infobox" and you get "This WikiProject provides a central location for infobox designers and maintainers..." So you hang around for a year or two and you see an arbcom case about infoboxes with someone named Gerda on it and later on you think to ask on their talk page about the infobox problem you had way back a long time ago. So now they give you a new link to a page with a list of boxes. You click on one of the names on the list, wait for the page to load, and you see a page with a bunch of symbols that says "Template documentation". If you want "template documentation" for a different template, you can back click, wait for the original page to load, then go to a new page and click on that one and wait for it to load. By now you have used up the 20 minutes or so you have alloted to Wikipedia for that day, so you shut down your computer and forget about the infoboxes. At this point I don't remember what I did about looking for the infoboxes, but I do remember that I wasn't able to find any useful information using intuitive search terms. If you want to promote infoboxes, you should reach out to the people who want to use them, and make it easy for them to select what they need. —Neotarf (talk) 04:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that interesting that the world seems to know me as the one for infoboxes, while I don't know a technical thing about them, met the first infobox discussion as late in 2012, Samuel Barber, I was against them then (it's still on the talk page). I simply think they are good for my articles (and actually all articles), and defended that view in teh case. I never went your ways, asking in general, but copied what I found and asked a designer when it was not sufficient, please give me feedback on {{infobox Bach composition}}. I am restricted two 2 comments in a discussion (a blessing!), and I try to avoid the topic as too contentious, - please see the project. Your concerns are valid. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest problem is that there are far more types of infoboxes than e.g. welcome templates. At last count, I found over 2,000 of them and the list at Wikipedia:List of infoboxes may not even be complete as it is manually updated.
A gallery could only present a tiny fraction of what is available and even that would entail considerable effort in creating something representative. I do understand the problem you describe, but I can't see an easy solution. For what it's worth, I'd always follow links from a large list by opening each one in a new browser tab, so that I don't have to reload the list each time I want to follow a different link. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 09:33, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If 2000 infoboxes are too much for an infobox specialist, just think what a challenge this must be to the average user, who just wants to pick something quickly from a list, and not have to redo it. Could you have a page displaying "ten most popular infoboxes for BLPs" "ten recommended infoboxes for schools" etc? Do they have categories on them, so you can see a list by category? Are they linked to any Wikiproject that has made a recommendation about them, like groups that edit a particular sports topic? Can you see where the infoboxes are used, so you can go to an actual article, and see how it is set up? And why oh why is WP:INFOBOX a link to an apparently inactive Wikproject for specialists, instead of to a generalized page for the user. User information is hidden in a help file somewhere. I suspect a lot of the resistance to infoboxes would dissipate if there was more effort to make this information accessible to the editors who are most likely to use them. How can you sell something without a catalog?
Gerda, you are not restricted from general discussion about infoboxes, see here specifically, you "may participate in wider policy discussions regarding infoboxes with no restriction". It's only talk about specific articles that will get you into trouble. Surely this does not include creating or reorganizing general infobox information for users. How does the German Wikipedia do it? —Neotarf (talk) 18:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know what Trotz means? (DYK ... that the hymn "Jesu, meine Freude" (Jesus, my joy) by Johann Franck and Johann Crüger mentions singing in defiance of the "old dragon", death, and fear?) - I try to stay out of infobox discussions. (Even if I am kindly permitted to some.) Time is limited, look around on this page, I am here for music and helping with articles. Millions of articles found an infobox without me, including almost 150k for {{infobox person}} alone, not counting other biographies, - just a few classical composers look as if they are not part of this project, - do I care? - I care about the loss of people, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Aloha. I am sorry to bother you, but I have a few simple questions about an article in Der Spiegel. Google translate works fine to get the overall meaning, but when it comes to using the material in an article, that's another matter. For example, there's this sentence:
Molly Crabapple hat eine neue Rolle erfunden: die politische Journalistenkünstlerin. Sie zeichnet, schreibt journalistische Texte, und was ihr tagsüber durch den Kopf geht, twittert sie an ihre 41 000 Follower.
Google translate gives the following result:
Molly Crabapple has invented a new role: the political journalists artist. It is characterized writes journalistic texts, and what her daytime goes through her head, she tweets to her 41,000 followers.
I would like to use a more accurate English translation of die politische Journalistenkünstlerin. "The political journalists artist" doesn't sound right. Any ideas? Viriditas (talk) 09:34, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Problem is that "Journalistenkünstlerin" is a combination of words which is not possible in English. I would say "journalist and artist" and give the original in brackets for those who can enjoy it. Is there a verb "twitter", as in German? My version:
Molly Crabapple has invented a new role: the political journalist and artist. She draws and writes journalistic texts, and she "twitters" to her 41,000 followers her thoughts during the day.
Thank you! I will provide both as you recommend. I may have another question about the article later. I will try not to bother you too much. I think the verb "twitter" is supposed to be "tweet", like a bird, as in "she tweets to her followers". Viriditas (talk) 09:56, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OMG, it's totally about Twilight and love! You should definitely have a picture of Robin Pattinson and Kirsten Dunst in a meadow. What could be more romantic than vampires? Belle (talk) 10:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I'm not being cast in the role of class clown, sitting at the back flicking paper and pulling Becky Thompson's hair (I did get in trouble for pulling Becky Thompson's hair which is why I used her, but you can substitute her for any other girl with pullable hair.) Belle (talk) 10:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have several, different ones, under copyright. They are linked. I think the article translates enough of what is needed to understand, and I would not want to prefer one. (It's untranslatable anyway, no chance English could say Dämmergrau.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:37, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Let's see how it could be said in the article that the third of the scores is on an English text, and that the Hyperion ref has translations of three songs? not counting the last external link which says "translation"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously: I wrote hundreds of articles on music to German texts: people found the translations without bolding or didn't care ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, first get it off, wrap in "nowiki" or whatever, and say on the listing that it was a mistake ;) - The horse example and a sonata example tell me that it should be on one of the related article talks, mentioning the others, and announced on the project and task force. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:40, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that the reader would be mainly interested in the person, not the specific geography and politics of Australia. There is a link to more information. Which "Australia" claimed what territory when in history? I don't think it matters. - However, I didn't say the edit was unacceptable, - I might have added "unnecessary detail". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, please see this discussion for some background. The creator of the article has now "disappeared". Can you help expand the article? Do you know someone who could? Article content isn't my forte, and working on an article about a Pole when I don't even know the language is that much harder. I know it's not choral-related, but it is classical music. In glancing at the Polish wiki, it doesn't look like there are many sources for the material. I'm not keen on adding material that is unsourced, even though I've created a mostly unsourced framework. Plus, I don't know how notable the fellow is outside Poland where there might be English sources. I admit I haven't done much research into it, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:24, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I added 2 links from the university, one in English saying that he is head of the faculty for strings, and a bio in Polish, + a bio from Naxos, - your turn, and perhaps Poeticbent, the poet of the WP poem "Letting go ..." ... of the blocked and banned fairies who would do the work for us ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll see if I can get around to working some material in supported by the links and then move the links to refs. It'd be nice if we could get more secondary reliable sources to support who he is and why he's notable.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I probably should have looked, - I only saw something with a very strange name (Hochschule AND University) pop up in a very strange place, + it was late ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to say thank you for the award -- it is much appreciated. Looking at your user page, it says you were born in 2009 (age 4?) This can't be true! Is there some sort of mistake or typo here? Just curious. Beautiful church, btw, and so are its choir members. God bless. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:33, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My user was born then ;) - more memories of the real GA available further down in the box, and on top of the user page, below what I stand for, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:36, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I appreciate your thanks for my edits to the Emma Kirkby page. My thanks to you for your edits of the Canticles of Ecstasy page. I will try to create more Hildegard album pages, which I hope you will review. Best regards. Roger
Carlofantom (talk) 11:59, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I enjoy it! I watch your page, - if you list new articles there I will notice. Later today, a picture I took will appear on the Main page, did you know. The article is missing something that Emma has now ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:04, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda -- this article is so interesting. Most people would think to make the article centered around the Strauss song. Instead, you made the poem the center. Do you see this useful for other poems that have been set by multiple composers, or is this case an exception? Thanks for all that you do. -- kosboot (talk) 18:21, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The poem was the start of the inspiration, and (may the poet excuse me) not good/notable enough to stand on its own, but good in the context, - an article to grow, - when I started I didn't know that others set the same text, and it would be good to know if they did it independently or knew the Strauss version, - curiosity never ends ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now is that fair that you should be the one who gives away all that gorgious gems and receive none? (Oh, well, you did actually, as I can notice, above. At least one more... ) Hafspajen (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Red light!!
Thank you, love it. Today's went to an editor who had been proclaimed awesome three times before, and I received one awesome, three sapphires, a moonstone, an emerald, and now an aquamarine, but it's not fattening, just flattering, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You give her jewelry and she gives you an idea ;) - here of a bird in red sky (see my user page, pumpkin sky) by an Iranian composer who lives in Sweden, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hussy
A little warning -a music school is NOT the regular music gymnasium, but something with a much lower profile. (and filnm school) A kind of Hochschule, but NOT university and not music High school. No regular education, I may say, but bits and parts here and there.
Mansoor Hosseini, born 1967, is a Swedish composer.
In 2003, Hosseini founded Gothenburg Music & Dance Company (GMDC), which in 2007 transformed into the Ensemble Themus in Gothenburg with a goal to popularize the concept of theatrical music -or theatre music? bit unclear concept His work in theatrical music is inspired by modern dance, theater and martial arts.
As a percussionist Hosseini is fascinated by improvisation. He employs a lot of improvisation and sometimes uses a system of improvisation in his compositions that gives freedom to the musicians to improvised in a controlled and measured way.
He lectures in musical notation, composition, communication between musicians and composers and musicians and musical notation. (whatewever that is)
== Selected works ===== Orchestral works ===
2014 – Bright Blue Bird, In a Grey Red Sky - violin & orkester
2014 – Waves Above - blockflöjt concerto
2014 – Non Se Que Que Quen Za Za - violinorkester
1999 – Into the Earth - oboe concerto
=== Chamber music ===
2013 – Psychological Song - mezzosopran & cello
2013 – Three Words - mezzosopran & gitarr
2013 – Taïraphone - saxofon & percussion
2013 – Cold, Dry Wind - piano
2012 – Zapp Music - gitarr
2012 – Mountain Top - 3 blowinstument tree? & piano (woodwind!)
2012 – Rubaiyat - mezzosopran & piano
2011 – 3 tangos - kvartett
2011 – Mr & Mrs Saxophone - tenor saxofon
2011 – Heavy Metal Bars - violin
2011 – Labyrinth of Moods - blockflöjt, mezzosopran & slagverk
2010 – Coffee Time - percussiontrio
2008 – Four For Four - 4 celli
2008 – Working Time - percussiontrio
2007 – Le Sonnet - orgel
2006 – Sonata for a Prisoner - violin
2006 – Swedish Raga - Bb klarinett, cello & drumms
2006 – Barock ’n’ Roll - 8 instrument & dirigent
2002 – Taïraga - 13 instrument
2001 – Esfand I - stråkkvartett, didjeridoo & slagverk
That bit about "komunikation ... mellan musiker/musiknotation" is bit odd, I don't know how you can communicate with the notation. Maybe it is meant to be interpretation of musical notation but that's not what it says. Belle (talk) 15:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What are those little cloths called, with embroideries, in old villages put on the wall? What are they called and do we have an article on it? Hafspajen (talk) 14:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The things you know! I confess I didn't believe it until I got to the line: "The word "sampler" is sometimes inaccurately applied to any piece of needlework meant for display." ;) - I just created a composer. I didn't do a thing, Belle did the translation, but I turned the link to blue, so by the unfathomable wisdom of our arbitrators I created it. I would say that the term "create" is also sometimes inaccurately applied. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I only filled in some tiny bits in Hafspajen's translation, so don't go giving me too much credit. (and I noticed I forgot to translate the instruments, but you seem to have got them anyway). Belle (talk) 22:29, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My great-grandmother is Swedish and since she passed 90 she's started pretending she can't understand English any more. Belle (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The two close-ups were not in the garden, where they have labels, but one on the bank of the Rhine, the other (pink) close to the boats. That one actually may have a label, I will look on my next visit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not to blow up the DYK nomination further: I don't know what 11/11 means, and if it's November, I guess the answer is no, at least I asked about August in May and the answer was "no, no more than six weeks in advance". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
11/11 is the American way of saying Remembrance Day. In the UK it's a time of respect and remembrance of the fallen of all nations; not a time of triumph but a time of humility. The Queen wears black in mourning for the lost and the bereaved of all nations, and there is a cathedral service of remembrance. I agree about the minimum six weeks in advance for DYK special occasions queues. However my experience of WP tells me that it's quicker and more peaceful to keep all requests open to view, and to allow the consensus to do its work. So no worries, I think this one will work out the way you want. --Storye book (talk) 13:34, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation, that really helped, - abbreviations are sometimes tough, but just numbers even more so. Having understood, I think it's not a good idea to single out one battle - even an important one - on that day. All requests are open to view and change, even those for Special occasions, on the same page. I have no personal "want" for that article to appear, several options are good, as long as a hook mentioning 6 June doesn't appear in July or one mentioning 21 July on a different day. - Lovely to see one of "your" churches in the queue! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:04, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, yes it's a relief to see my church nom promoted at last. The publicity helps the public appreciate the quality of their local buildings, so that maybe in the future they will not stick white plastic windows and flat-roofed lavatories all over them. We can only hope. --Storye book (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
During the Kronstorf and Sankt Florian periods Bruckner composed five Name-day cantatas. Two of these earlier cantatas were re-issued later for other Name-days or other festivities (see WAB 61b, 61c, and WAB 93b, 93c on List of compositions by Anton Bruckner). Unfortunately the are very few literature available on these earlier cantatas and only two (the Festgesang WAB 60 and the Mayer Cantate WAB 15) have been recorded as yet. I am, however, intended to draft wiki-pages on these earlier cantatas (which could be expanded, when new literature data or new recordings would be available).
I agree. I friend of mine is thinking about a name for a cantata, Carpe diem, for a school's anniversary ;) - For my dear connections to Belgium see here, updated after two unhappy years without a concert, look at the plan! - A year ago, I have been called an infobox-warrior, did you know? Here, of all places, see? My answer was this. Dona nobis pacem, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your optimism
What can I say that you haven't already said?
I know! WP would be a MUCH friendlier place if there were more editors with your view of the world!!
Thank you. See above, I have been called a warrior, almost exactly a year ago, - thank goodness I can laugh about that and sing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
bzzt, they need to be "admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves." (link from "here" on top of my user page) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:05, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I started. I would like to know where this comes from because I don't see another Wikipedia article. Without access to a source, I find it a bit tricky. I had no idea that we don't have a category for the composers of symphonies, at least I can't find one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see my edit summary? I said that it is a good picture, but in a wrong position for two reasons: it has nothing to do with his family (the paragraph where you placed it), and no picture should be on the left opposite of one on the right. I don't know the article (of featured article quality) well enough to know where a good position would be. Your best chances are to go to the talk page of the article and suggest the inclusion of this picture. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have no German, but I rolled two identical refs together. The map doesn't have a legend, and English publications aren't all labelled as such. Otherwise looks OK Jimfbleak - talk to me?18:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:IMAGELOCATION against "sandwiching", and I still follow the former guideline: Avoid placing images on the left at the start of any section or subsection, because it makes it harder for readers to find the beginning of the text. Images on the left are best placed somewhere after the first paragraph. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! You look like a really busy Wikipedian! So I'm doubly appreciaive of your support for my efforts on the Talk:The_Final_Cut_(album) page. Thank you so much!
What would really help me is if you go to that article, review the two edits being fought over, and expressed your preferences on the article's Talk page. Anybody can post to a talk page, whether they contributed to the article or not. It would help me A LOT to have some support, because right now it's 3 against 1, and I am the 1.
Either way, I wish you the best!
~j.
I am busy, and at the moment too busy - there's life besides WP - to study the case more, but will watch. Look for my name on talk N and see that I try to avoid confrontation, there's more than enough already ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Infoboxes for other Bruckner's works
Beste Gerda,
When I made some update of the pages on Bruckner's symphonies they had already an infobox.
As you suggest I will adapt the content of one of them to create an infobox for Bruckner's other pages.
Beautiful! I made a few minor changes. Infoboxes are criticised for being "too long", therefore I dropped "composed" for now, as performance and publishing help to the same dates. The parameter would be useful if he had worked on it for a long time before, for example, or if it was never performed or we don't know when. Keep simple ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example of two pieces (might be versions) with different data, - an alternative is to have two infoboxes in the same article, recommended if more parameters are different than equal,
I have in the meantime created the infobox for Mass No. 2, adapting that used for Symphony No. 1. Is it OK for you?
Question: How should I proceed with Bruckner's early Masses on which there are 3 different (short) works? Should I then put 3 different infoboxes?
I would actually think about splitting them in three articles, however short, much easier to link to and to serve readers who want to know only about one (not mentioning that the masters of spelling might insist on a lowercase "masses"), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Took me a while to fix Augustinerkirche, at least a bit. - should be moved ;) - How about a image of the three places in the three Mass articles? In the box or in the text, for a feeling of history. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have also created the infoboxes for the Missa solemnis and the Requiem. OK for you too?
New day: did you notice that your miraculous additions made me change the top of this page from defiance to dreams? - Fine tuning: we talked bout the images, the vocal compositions would profit from parameters on the text (I will do Psalm 150, as an example), the biblical text could be linked to Wikisource (same), everything in the infobox should also be in the text (I didn't always check that), and some more performers could possibly be linked, at least to corresponding German articles (use {{ill}} then). Magnificat: there are examples, such as Magnificat (Rutter) and Magnificat (Schütz). The Lord bless you and keep you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at Psalm 50, added text parameters, also {{lang}} for passages in languages other than English (which helps people using screen readers) and linked a bit more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When reviewing the Infoboxes, I have added a few wikilinks and corrected some copy-and-paste errors. I will check later whether every info in the infobox is consistent with that in the remaining of the page. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 18:35, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure that I am sane. Are you? Does it matter? ;) (any particular reason for your musing?) (I like to work with many people, most of them called Precious, like yourself, hundreds of them.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So I have a gift for you, dear Gerda (as you saw) – Joel Brand, spruced up a little and ready to go. There's one book I used as a source that I still need to check (there's always one!), but I should get round to it within the next day or two. The article can always be improved, but I think the basics are in place. I'm still not hugely keen on TFA, but I won't kick and scream this time if it happens, at least not too much. Thank you once again for your patience and understanding! SlimVirgin(talk)21:27, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was afraid you would say that! I think I'll have to leave it up to you and Gerda. I've gifted it to her. (Gerda, is this the first time you've had an article as a present?) SlimVirgin(talk)22:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Probably the first, I would hopefully remember ... - a precious gift! Nominated, for 13 July or possibly 28 July (or any day, why not). Please improve the blurb, pruning is difficult for someone who doesn't know the article as well as you do. - I often think of people when I write articles, some are mentioned on my user page, including my grandfather ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The title is more than just my alt name and alter ego. Not sure if you've seen this, but I figured you would enjoy this little essay I wrote some time back. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER16:24, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like an interesting man :) I'm curious if there are other, similar versions of this in other cultures. It seems a pity to only have the one very American version of the parable. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER16:40, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In one of my favourite operas, Gianni Schicchi, the hero is the peasant, who is the witty one to fake a will in favour of a noble family, not forgetting to give himself more than all others, - and his daughter is then "fit" to marry one of them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're such a smart lady, you humble me regularly with your vast knowledge. I need regular humbling, so you are doing me a favor. ;) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER20:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you want to make me blush? (Examples pictured further up.) - This is not knowledge, it's interest. - Did you look at our FA? What do you think of the image in the upper right corner? Do you recognize that it is supposed to be a navbox? Do you like to navigate away from an article which you just entered? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You ask a lot of questions, young lady. I noticed the info box with the drop down menu, I've seen Eric do that before, I like those for many articles, although I prefer traditional infoboxes for science stuff. I did enjoy theatre in my youth (participating and watching), but opera has always escaped me. It's like they're singing a foreign language... Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER20:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful, very careful, see above for minefield. - This thing is not a collapsed infobox, as Eric sometimes uses, but see also. This is a navbox, tells you nothing about the article, but navigates away from it. The normal position for a navbox is on the bottom, and guess what? There it is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I noticed it looked different, the headers and such. That is different and pretty useful stuff. But will it be confusing to readers expecting a traditional "see also" section but its missing? Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER21:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is useful, but if users are used to seeing a "see also" and they don't, it might not immediately obvious. Consistency. I'm sure I would get voted down, but I'm one that like redundancy in stuff like that, and would probably like both. I'm funny that way. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER21:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Start over: Did you see the singer (where Eric helped)? What would you think if you came to a singer article, and instead of telling you when he was born and where he studied, you would get a navigation to other singers who studied with the same teacher, and not a picture of the singer, but of the teacher. ?? (And forgive me: I have no idea how "see also" comes into play.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the idea is interesting, again, kind of like a "see also" feature simply because they are tangentially related. I'm not sure about the example you use here (most singers that have articles here didn't study with someone, so consistency is a problem), but I'm intrigued by the idea in general. It isn't very "wikipedia", but it seems to be very "encyclopedia". I do like the idea of a nav box on an opera that links all the other operas from the same composer. That could be true with any musician, for example. Not prepared to have a final opinion, but the idea is very interesting. I can see that in some kinds of articles, it would be a huge improvement, I'm just not smart enough to know what all types of articles off the top of my head. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER12:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think we agree more than it looks. I am all for a navbox of all (or at least the notable) operas/works of a composer, but please where a navbox belongs: at the bottom. Look at Gianni Schicchi: it's at the bottom, {{Giacomo Puccini}} - Many composers have one. - The other navbox on top - which was there before - can't be as well formatted, - horizontal is better for a presentation of groups. I chose the (hypothetical) example to show how little sense it makes to me, to showcase not the topic of the article (opera/singer), but instead something secondary (composer/teacher). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh
Before you check who painted this, who do you think it did? (unless you know already)
qpq, you mean? I did a major review in that giant nom, which I counted as one, but the two others were so similar that I used them together. In this case, when you nominated for someone else, NO qpq is required, but they love you for doing an optional one, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, 2012 June 30.... Two years old... Gerda, can you help me find a reference for this Hans Baluschek beeing considered as an Entartete Kunst artist? Just realized that we don't have any refs and I am not getting any response because Sca just translated the article - and they don't seems to have any refs on it either (not on that sentence, as far I can see) Hafspajen (talk) 13:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fine! In both cases, I would mention the alternative movement in the lead and have a redirect. In the second infobox, I would have "alternative" both cases, or none, - none I guess because otherwise it looks like part of the name ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The 4 orchestral pieces are described so in the Gesamtausgabe. Before they were published separately. In the wiki-article they are described separately.
Hopefully I have understood what you meant about the Intermezzo. I have restored the Infobox about the Intermezzo (as "Alternative Intermezzo"), drafted a separate section "Alternative Intermezzo" in String Quintet (Bruckner) and created a Page Intermezzo (Bruckner), which redirects to String Quintet (Bruckner). Is it OK so?
The "Drei Sätze für Orchester" WAB 97 and the "Marsch in d-Moll" WAB 96 were originally published separately. Currently there are grouped in the Gesamtausgabe as "Vier Orchesterstücke" [34] and also generally recorded together. How can I solve this issue? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's not "the solution", I'm afraid. First: mention the above high up in the article, including the German names, best with redirects for all names and translations (such as Three movements for orchestra). Look if translations are titles, published in English, then capitalize. As the three and the march have different catalogue entries, even separate articles were an option. However, Psalmen Davids is one article, with 26 catalogue numbers. Another example of published together leads to one article: Celtic Voices and Hale Bopp. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:06, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done, with refs to the catalogue of the Gesamtausgabe German and English version.
First: you explain Intermezzo in the lead and have a redirect. Then you ask for explanation on the article talk (after perhaps reading the many requests on her talk page to be less cryptic in edit summaries. She did something similar here). You have so nice polite ways, perhaps you are able to reach understanding ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It's not "forbidden", look at the example, there are still two (were three before) ;) - In the meantime I tried to sort out the names of the 4 orch pieces and their parts, please check if you agree, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:05, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it looks confusing, with so many data different, - I would restore the former version and argue on the article talk page if needed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Saw my name - got to love the ping thing. I still feel the same way as then....that is let the main editors decide the content and layout preferred. Don't let Wikiproject members bully you around - this POV is policy as per WP:Advice pages. All that is needed is a talk about the merit and disadvantages. In this case the second box is nice but does look a bit out of place. But that said I would respect the choice of the main contributors to have it there if they wish since there is no policy broken... as in not misleading, no OR etc.. No need to cause conflict for no reason - best the content editor move on to a new article - not wasting time trying to defend there valid contributions. To be honest I generally stay away for this problem now - as in dont edit classical music article much. I do read lots of them and fix refs from time to time. On a side note I just finished Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia and would love Nikki or Gerda Arendt to look it over perhaps a nice copy edit as you both know my grammar skills are lacking. Fuhghettaboutit has done a great job copyeditng behind me but would love a third set of eyes. -- Moxy (talk) 01:45, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for coming over, Moxy, same sound thinking as ever! - Main editor, what do you think of splitting the four in three and one, and have extra articles on the extra movements in the string pieces? (as Nikkimaria forked BWV 120a off BWV 120, and several others, and therefore several Bach cantata articles don't have an infobox) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner
Beste Gerda,
Writing pages on Bruckner's works is not an easy job, because there are often several versions and editions of his works, and a lot works, e.g. the String Quartet and Psalm 146, were not issued, even never performed during his life. The older books over Bruckner are mostly not giving very accurate info on this matter. I had so to update, even correct in depth several wiki-pages on Bruckner's works. For this purpose C. van Zwol's recent book is an excellent reference - unfortunately only available in Dutch.
I would have preferred to have two boxes than one. If others think that one box is the best choice, I will not quarrel. I will review the concerned articles (String Quartet, String Quintet and Four Orchestral Pieces) and check whether the removed info is present in the body of the article.
Beste Grüße aus Belgien, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think - see above - that your best bet might be to split Intermezzo from the String quintet, not to confuse readers by too much in one, and to have it appear in a list of Intermezzos, for example, - we don't have to follow the organization of the German Wikipedia which doesn't have any article. Similar: the march and the quartet. The four pieces, I would create two new articles, one for 3, one for one. - I reorganized this page a bit, hope that's ok with you. What you do about Bruckner's works is unique! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you suggest, it would indeed better to do so, as I did for Bruckner's early Masses, i.e., having a lead article for the Four Orchestral Pieces and linked articles for the Drei Sätze für Orchester and the Marsch in d-Moll, and split the "Intermezzo" and the "Alternative Rondo" from their lead article.
Dear Gerda,
thank you so much for your appreciation and thanks for my short introduction to Anne Sofie von Otter. I'm admiring your outstanding efforts for Wiki very much. One thought: You are writing outstanding articles about the Bach cantatas. Obviously you know nearly all interpretations, especially those by Rilling. In this coherence and your personal involvement to Francfort: You surely know Hans Joachim Erhard, an outstanding organist and especially (!) continuo player in the recording cycles of the cantatas with Rilling until his death in 1990. I personally think, he should be included in Wiki, because he really is/has been notable. How do you think about? Best wishes and thanks, --BachChopinFavorite (talk) 13:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Good idea, start it in user space and tell me where to watch, I am quite busy, look around. Sorry I don't know Erhard personally, there's a big scene around Frankfurt, - I take the recording information from bach-cantatas, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:34, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your revert of Psalm 146 (Bruckner). See the discussion I had with Nikkimaria. I found her argumentation for removing the text dull.
Furthermore, we and she are apparently not on the same wave length! I restored dates of publication with ref of the Gesamtausgabe and she continues to say that it is still not substantiated... I also saw your discussion about the Infobox of Symphony No. 8...
I will stop any discussion with her.
I restored the text without seeing your discussion. (I saw it later.) Two pieces of advice: 1) You gave the ref Gesamtausgabe in your discussion, but is it in the article, as an inline citation? (formality, formality) 2) Don't discuss "with her", discuss content on the article talk pages with whoever is interested, - please. Did you know that I mentioned Bruckner's symphonies a lot last year? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Despite the fact I added the ref Gesamtausgabe in the article as an inline citation, she persisted to say that it was still not substantiated. The reason that I definitely will no more discuss with her... Beste Grüße, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 21:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The examples of the Magnificat, Psalms 114 and 146 are quite unique, because they were first recorded in 1971 (according to van Zwol), 1984 and 1987, using scores prepared especially for these performances, long before there were issued in the Gesamtausgabe by Paul Hawkshaw in 1996.
For the Magnificat a score was prepare by Carragan. You find a copy of this score on Jonn Berky's site. After the issue in the Gesamtausgabe two recordings have been issued: in 1997 by Farnberger with the St. Florianer Sängerknaben and in 2011 by Thomas Kerbl (Linzer Brucknerfest).
For Psalm 114 a score based on Bruckner's manuscript has also made (by Robert Simpson?). No "faithful" recording of Psalm 114 (i.e., in accordance with the official score) has been issued after the issue of the Gesamtausgabe.
For Psalm 146, a performance by Riedelbauch (28 November 1971) using a copy of Bruckner's manuscript had been issued in c. 1973. Another performance occurred in Vienna by Heinz Wallberg with the Niederosterreichische Tonkuenstler Orchestra on 10 November 1991, of which a recording is put in the Bruckner Archive. In 1995 a performance by Leon Botstein, which used the score prepared by Hawkshawn for the Gesamtausgabe, has been recorded and also put in the Bruckner Archive. John Berky has provided me with a copy of it. The recording, which has not been commercially issued, is unfortunately not of very high quality.
Make it sense that I put this info somewhere else: comment page of Bruckner or by each work, respectively? Let me please know it.
The template "Verdi" is for sure interesting, but I do not know whether I would apply for Bruckner, because of his high number of smaller religious and secular works. See List of compositions by Anton Bruckner.
At the end of this week we leave for a 2-week holiday in the French Alps. In the meantime I will not have much time to devote to Wikipedia, because there is still much left to do in the house and the garden... --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't wait and started {{Anton Bruckner}}. I think it's not too large (we had a proposal for Mozart, you can imagine ...), and let readers see the more unusual composition better. No rush, enjoy your vacation. When you return, you could start something on the recording and publishing history of Bruckner's works, it sounds interesting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"My current and future approach to conflict is and will be moderated by my understanding of the value of reasoned discussion where possible, and formal dispute-resolution processes where necessary" - guess who wrote that? - I found it here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Georg Poplutz
On 2 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Georg Poplutz, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a reviewer wrote that tenor Georg Poplutz's performance of Schubert's Winterreise created a "cosmos of emotions"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Georg Poplutz. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I've just seen this in the queue for DYK and had a check for the references (as I remembered it didn't have much in the way of inline referencing on SV), and I noticed that most of the Swedish version is almost a straight lift from [35] (there's a couple of rearrangements of things like "music for percussion" to "percussion music" but most of it is word for word). I'm going to raise it at DYK talk, but thought I should let you know. Troublemakingly yours, Belle (talk) 23:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I bashed it about a bit with my prose hammer and I think it should be passable now (sorry I didn't check the Swedish sources before [Contrite face]). Belle (talk) 00:11, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I didn't notice that earlier Wiki links had been removed. They should be in though. It's common practice to provide links to locations/cities/lands/countries, etc. respectively for sites of interest. West and East Berlin/Germany are common terms. Alandeus (talk) 07:42, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree exactly: they are common terms, no more. - We do not typically link to well known places such as Paris or Italy, per WP:OVERLINK. I am not passionate either way, just found it funny that you inserted something that had just been removed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some German pictures
Gerda, please, could you fix some adecvate captions [36] on German Wiki before they start deleting the Lutefisk I added? If you don't mind... Hafspajen (talk) 13:52, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I signed it, but would not know what to say. The first one looks like any white fish, the last one like any fish dish, the center one - the one I like - comes with its own label ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Well, the firs one is cooked fish. The second one is Lutefisk in Bergen fishmaket, and the third is a dish made with boiled potatoes, bacon, mustard sauce, and mashed peas and lutefisk with butter, a traditional way of serving it. Hafspajen (talk) 14:45, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will watch it. It doesn't matter which fish market, and the traditional way is described in the article. I will add captions if they miss some. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In a way it matters, because Bergen is in Norway, and lutfisk is made in Norway... ... It is from its homeland, so to say. And also, something that is not in the article - the Swedes eat lutefis every Christmas. It is a traditional part of the Swedish Christmas dishes, the day after Chrismas day. Hafspajen (talk) 14:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that was a nice surprise to come back to. Where do I go to exchange the voucher for the sapphire? Belle (talk) 09:20, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You ask the photographer. You can do that on Commons where he is an admin. Did you kow that he also wrote about the Great Dismal Swamp maroons? "... people have the ability, as individuals and communities, to take control of their lives, even under oppressive conditions" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:34, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not where I'd choose to set up home (Belle, would you like to live in the Great Dismal Swamp or on the Fantastic Sunny Beach? Give me a minute.) Poor slaves, imagine what life must have been like to run away to that. Anyway, I don't think I shall be venturing to Commons on the chance of a single sapphire of indeterminate size. If there is a lorry full of fist-sized ones going, I'll be over there in a flash. Belle (talk) 11:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What do think about the prospect of meeting a nice man whom you can't meet here any more? My partner on Kafka (so far the most successful TFA, did you know? see my user infobox if you don't believe it) thinks that things got too kafkaesque here. I agree to kafkaesque, of course ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Shirt58. Recipe on my desk by tomorrow please (and if it has chocolate shavings and cream on top so much the better; I can do a few more lengths in the pool to burn it off, no problem). Belle (talk) 14:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Belle, my only academic qualification is a BA (Hons) in Eng. Lit. from the Parkville Soviet. (Well, I started it off as "Eng. Lit." at the University of Tasmania - no, Tasmania isn't a fictional place, and yes, there really is a University there - but it ended up as a degree in "Cultural studies".) So you'll have to let me know whether you want the recipe for the baked or unbaked version of the Kafe-Kaes. --Shirt58 (talk) 12:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Buildings on wikipedia as far as I know it is most common to put them in brackets in towns. It's only geographical articles you use the comma.♦ Dr. Blofeld11:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes: if that football game ends up as a draw at the end of extra time, I think it would be the polite thing to do to award the trophy to Brazil for hosting such a lovely tournament instead of going to a Penalty shoot-out. Just sayin'. --Shirt58 (talk) 14:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats on winning the world cup! Probably the first time I've ever wanted Germany to win a football match hehe!! They were easily the best team in the tournament.♦ Dr. Blofeld13:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, but some help would be greatly appreciated.
I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm not sure where else to go. A user named John has deleted the evidence he purports to not know the existence of in a current ANI discussion. I reverted his edit that attempted to cover up the evidence, and his response was to threaten to ban me. Since his stance seems to be that anything he doesn't like deserves a banning, I do not wish to engage him directly. He's shown himself to be not trustworthy in my estimation. You may see the thread here. The evidence he has tried to cover up is the user page for NatureGuy1980, which I administered before I gave up editing Wikipedia because of bullying behavior such as this. 98.223.105.116 (talk) 06:14, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how I could help you, but also don't see where you would need help. The evidence is in the history for everybody to see, and it is discussed. I would not change a user's own statement, but actually think yours is stronger now (compared to mentioning a single attacker, - the believers in the holy MoS are a movement, not a single person.) I translated the Invisible Rail, not the invisible rail (which becomes almost invisible in prose), but believe that readers actually understand both. I wrote A Boy was Born, and am disgusted every time I look at it. - My advice: go to John and thank him for making your statement stronger. - (Reminds me that I should thank the arbs for their blessing of admonishment and restriction.) - In the thread you mentioned, "plea for peace" is the/my last word. Look above: it's now on the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gerda. 98.223.105.116, if you have left Wikipedia, I suggest making a clean break. If you have a grudge against another user I suggest bringing evidence rather than making unsubstantiated allegations, which isn't allowed. I'll copy this to your IP user talk in case you don't see it here. --John (talk) 07:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The evidence has been discussed at length. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. In particular, see the second point raised here. A negotiated close, an indefinite block? My faith in the system had been somewhat restored with the action taken against SMcC yesterday. Your heavy-fisted actions are making me reconsider yet again. You are doing a really great job of discouraging knowledgable editors.
Re:Christian music
Hello, Yes, many of the works of J. S. Bach and Heinrich Schütz are within the scope of WP Christian music. However I am not a member of that project (and it has been labelled semiactive) so perhaps adding it to relevant articles may not be important. Members of WP Christian music should identify those articles, so other editors are not obliged to do so. (I only belong to WP Anglicanism and WP Cornwall.)--Johnsoniensis (talk) 13:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your message today was a very big surprise; I never expected to be called an «awesome Wikipedian». Under my former name I had a listing for making numerous edits. The assessment and generally gnomish activity is most of my work rather than the creation of new articles as writing a new article which will stand up to scrutiny by others can take a long time. (Though I know very little German I contributed a few times to the German WP as User:FFS.) You are certainly thorough in going back to my early contributions on Cornish topics; the picture shows a building once used by German immigrants to Manchester. Thank you so much for the sapphire.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 09:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy with your pictured response! I am a gnome myself, and I am so proud of it that it's intentionally the only topicon I show, and I like to find fellow gnomes and fairies. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:56, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Spelling
Even in English, I often get "i before e except after c" wrong. Fortunately the spell-checker is there to help me. But German is a lost cause for me. I would never notice the problem, and my spell checker says it is all spelled wrong. :~) Aymatth2 (talk) 13:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ei vs. ie is hopeless for spell-checker, because we have sie and sei, Stiel and steil, Lied and Leid. But we don't have Kreig ;) - The problem I see, more generally, is: what do we do when a "reliable source" is wrong? In this case, the title page of the book shows that the title is misspelled. In a recent article, a source said that the hymn was by Martin Luther. Wrong. Yes, he wrote one that starts similarly, but this was a different one. When I noticed, I changed it, but wait for someone to say that I got the source wrong, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Google Books metadata is often wrong. E.g. Die deutschen Juden und der Kreig 1729. 1729? I came across a great example the other day with Ogura, Takeshi (1997-11-21). Dynamic Aspects Of Natural Products Chemistry. CRC Press. p. 178. ISBN978-90-5702-209-8. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) Somehow a chapter called The Louvre and its public persona, 1848-52 by Gabriel P. Weisberg has found its way into the scanned version of this book on chemistry. I always give a url so someone checking can see what I saw, even if the attribution is wrong.
And yes, apparently reliable sources often have errors of fact. Authors make mistakes, and publishers are often slack on checking facts in works by well qualified authors. If I find two sources that contradict each other, I often pick the one that seems right, but add a footnote saying what the other sources say. See Canadian Historical Dinner Service. A bit of original research maybe, but I think acceptable in a footnote. It may help prevent the error being put back in. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the sapphire. I really appreciate the positive feedback. I had forgotten about Fire pot. That was an early essay and had far too few sources. Still, it was amusing to write it. Thank you again. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK
I've proposed an ALT (just to shove a fly in the ointment; you know how I am, can't let things be straightforward). Belle (talk) 12:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Gerda Arendt for taking your time to thank editors for what they do to help Wikipedia. You are a very kind Wikipedia editor. Robert4565 (talk) 03:08, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I didn't have time yesterday to explain my reasoning to you regarding my AN post but will now. First, I wasn't aware of what was happening until I saw this comment to Belle's page, which I thought wasn't neutrally worded. When I noticed the AN thread, it seemed to me that it was going very fast, and that people were chiming in, who perhaps lack the context of the full story that began on a page I was working in November 2011, so I thought it might be a good idea to try to slow it down - although I really dislike posting in those kinds of discussions.
Before posting I took a look at Boing's page, saw your note and I took a look at the link to Anna Kravtchenko and the talk page, which to me seemed as though you were bringing attention to yet another issue - without coming right out and saying why. My feeling is that once a person is thanked, either on their page or with the notification system (of course because that's hidden there's no way of knowing whether you use it), it tends to add a sense of urgency and factionalism to a situation that instead needs de-escalation, which in turn could, to a degree, make the person somewhat involved.
As I mentioned earlier, I've been more than involved because this long series of events began with a dispute I had and since that time I've seen a lot of excellent editors leave in response. In the end, I have to ask myself whether what we've gained is worth what we've lost? And to be honest, I carry a huge burden of guilt because I believe I could have prevented these now-almost-three-years of fighting.
Anyway, sorry, this got long, but it's an explanation. I've not used the pingie function but if you want to bring the other's attention to it, that's fine with me. Victoria (tk) 15:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You read Belle's page, you can read there that I think that the war is a myth. Let's get beyond. Don't feel guilty for what you could have done or not, if only ... - the future starts now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I never saw that edit to my page until now :) Thanks for the thanks Gerda and sorry I didn't see it. I honestly didn't see any positives in blocking you for a month, though I'm so neutral I would have done it for anybody (that is anybody whose edits I was stalking; yes, stalking; oooooohhh). Belle (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I am used to it, I even invited, - I need guidance in language ;) - I cleaned up my Bach cantatas for two weeks ahead in case I get blocked. You can give Precious, if ;) - Other than that, you know ..., --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - found it. Shows (03:49, 14 July 2014 - 11:34, 14 July 2014) 8 hrs with only 2954 views so I deleted listing again because it doesn't meet 5,000 view criteria. Article was featured on main page on the 14 July 2014 only. Also, I added the Normandy Landings to "Lead hooks with at least 25,000 views" Atsme☯Consult23:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Again, pretty sure that the time in the archive is the time the article came off, if you look at the time Gerda received the credit (minutes after articles are put onto the main page) for this, and then this, the article is in the set above: credits are given when it goes on, time in archive is when it comes off. Thanks, Matty.00707:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if I've got this all wrong, but it seems to me that if you use the times shown at the "Recent additions" archive [44] as removal times rather than as start times, then the Hans Baluschek article was featured on the WP main page in excess of 12 hrs., and that can't be correct considering the times are calculated on 6-8-12 hr intervals. The DYK hook would have run from 11:21 on 13 July 2014 thru 03:49 on 14 July 2014 = 16 hrs. Look at the DYK features for 14 July 2014, and you will see 3 different start/end times with the last group being the featured articles that are archived for the main page. How do you access the other main page archives to see the prior DYK hooks that were featured on that same day? Also, the DYK notice states A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/July.[45] but there is no listing for the article under the July 13th date. It doesn't appear until July 14th. I also noticed the main page archives are missing from June 13, 2014 - July 13, 2014. [46] which makes it even more confusing. Did you know ... at times we are dealing with 3 different groups of DYK main page features on the same day, and not all are archived with the main page? Atsme☯Consult20:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you got it wrong, sometimes update is delayed, done manually, imperfectly, - this was one of the cases. I know exactly because I waited for the set following Baluschek to appear on 13 July (see top of this page), and couldn't believe it didn't come up until a day later. Talk to the DYK people if you don't believe me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you, Gerda. I just wanted to make sure we are all following the same procedure for counting the number of views. If all DYKs were featured at the same time each day, and all stayed up for 12 hrs., counting views wouldn't be an issue, but what I'm finding is confusion among editors over the 6-8-12 intervals. I've found some articles listed that included views the day before and the day after. If standard procedure is to count the date the DYK was archived as the pull date, then that's what I'll do. Atsme☯Consult21:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you mean "archive" when you say "pull"? ("Pull" means: a hook taken off the Main page prematurely because of a problem, while the set stays.) We need to look at two things, one is the time on the Main page, the other the traffic unrelated to DYK. If a hook is shown on two calendar days (quite normal even for 8-hour sets), the counts of both days are added, then divided by the total number of hours on the Main page. If there's considerable traffic on an article anyway (compare Flappy Bird[47] and Operation Overlord[48]), there's a formula to subtract that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:16, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did mean "archive" - thx for clarifying. How do you arrive at the total number of hours on the Main page? Is it the difference between the dates/times the former and current hooks are archived? Atsme☯Consult02:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. (As long as those are correct. We are all human and make mistakes.) - The next question - if a certain count/hour has to be achieved? - has been discussed before, - answer for simplicity's sake: the threshold is 5,000, no matter how long. - I am not too interest in statistics, there's a talk of that page also ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note why hooks can be up over 12 hours: just a quick look at the talk page shows "DYK is almost overdue": there is often no prep ready, so the main page set just stays up, no matter how many hours it's been there, until a new prep is made. Thanks, Matty.00709:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for helping me to better understand the mechanics behind DYK. Your kindness and patience is much appreciated. Atsme☯Consult13:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda. I was wondering why such an obviously virtuoso pianist has so little coverage these days, despite being relatively young as pianists go. Perhaps you were too? I found his official YouTube channel. It has no videos on it (although others have uploaded some old ones to their channels). Anyhow, he did have a comments section where someone in France, who had heard him play years ago and greatly admired him, asked when he would be performing again there. Cocarelli replied [49]:
"Je vous remercie pour ce souvenir heureux pour vous et pour moi. Malheureusement les concerts ce n'est plus d'actualité, du moins tant que je traînerai des troubles neurologiques qui me handicapent sévèrement dans ma mobilité et au piano. Je vis en France, en Sarthe, où j'enseigne le piano dans deux petites écoles de musique (dans mon état, impossible d'envisager une place dans un conservatoire). Vous souhaitant Bonne continuation. Merci encore!"
(Thank you for this happy memory, for both you and me. Unfortunately, concerts are no longer possible now that I suffer from neurological disorders that severely handicap my mobility and my ability to play the piano. I live in France, Sarthe, where I teach piano in two small music schools (in my condition, it is impossible to imagine a place in a conservatory). Wishing you good luck. Thank you again!)
You have one of these on this page and probably have many more throughout your archives. That is because you deserve them. You have gone out of your way to make Wikipedia a kinder, more enjoyable place and to recognize other editors' work. You should have a truckload of these. Also, your content and DYK contributions are extraordinary. You deserve much recognition for those as well. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! - I have two of these on the page, one is collapsed under "Blushing". Barnstars for kindness are most precious for me, on the background of my well-known battleground mentality ;) - I am awfully proud of today's DYK ... that pianist Anna Kravtchenko from Ukraine, winner of the Busoni competition, played Chopin "in a way that thoroughly warmed the heart and thrilled the senses"? - It's not the hook chosen for the Main page, but the one that warmed my heart. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:40, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are truly an outstanding editor. I appreciate that you have previously taken note of my modest contributions to the project. I plan to continue to make and increase my content contributions, and to spend less time on the more routine edits. Donner60 (talk) 04:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whom are you telling that? Andrea is a female German name and a male Italian name. I could be male using a female pen name. You could be female using ... - Who cares? Every editor is a human being. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All true. With registered editors, you assume that there is one human being for each account, and that is more important than your gender. With unregistered editors, you don't know the number of human beings because of dynamic IPs. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda. I've moved your comment to the talk page, which is where discussion of announcements should happen. Hope you don't mind. WormTT(talk) 13:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, on the contrary, thank you! I wrote spontaneously - had no time - and just found out out that it wasn't the right place. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:29, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda! Thanks for your very helpful comments on the Chopin FA review. If the situation is now OK with you, are you wiling to give a formal support on the review page? Or if there's anything still outstanding, do let me know. I am trying to get it wrapped up now. Best, --Smerus (talk) 19:52, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for fixing all points I mentioned so far. I didn't read the music section in detail yet, and have little time these days. I may actually get to reading now, because I found out that what I wanted to do next - update the Bach cantatas for next Sunday - I had done already, in preparation to be blocked for a month ;) (arbitration enforcement, did you know?) - Andy was also under pressure, for formatting a malformed infobox, helping a new editor. Do you understand??? One (!) of the arbitrators clearly saw that, - the one resigned. I keep singing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your nose is clean ;) - It's easy to ignore "these arb things" as long as they don't threaten to block your friend for helping a new user, and yourself for cleaning up after a little series of unexplained reverts. - I enjoyed "awakening", imagine you too, and Nikkimaria, - the arbs (whom I expected to be able to read a page history, but perhaps I expected too much) probable saw a battle. - What do they see, at all? The one who really looked now left the team, - what does that tell me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately there is no valuable, commercially available recording of this interesting first version. I enjoy Rademann's live performance, a copy of which I have been granted by Hans Roelofs. I find it regrettable that this excellent performance is not commercially available.
You are right. Rademann is one of "my" articles, - you could give him an infobox ;) - How was your vacation? - You have a choice now to restore the second infobox in the quintet and quartet or to write the separate articles for the single movements, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We had a fine holiday in the French Alps. During the first week of it we ware in the Queyras, where I have taken a lot of photos of plants. I have uploaded the best of them on Commons. Some photos are "first uploads", e.g., for Valeriana saliunca and Brassica repanda.
Next week I will again have a look on Bruckner's quintet and quartet.
Gut! The image next to the discography is too large, and the many brackets a bit confusing (year sometimes in brackets, sometimes not, etc.). Translations that are not titles don't get title capitals. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to Environmental_impact_of_wind_power#Cultural_impact, I got a strong feedback from an IP. Way beyond good manners. I personally believe that Aesthetics play a much more important role in technology / large project discussions than most mere technical aspects. The hillbilly image of Säuwäntzt is quite helpful for them to get their message accross ;) Serten (talk) 08:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda! Thank-you again! What a nice surprise to be honoured by you one year later! Here is my thank-you the first time: [51], followed by the day a half-year later when I was thinking about what a good person you are and I just had to let you know: [52]. If I ever go to Germany someday, my first stop will be to tell you in person how sweet you are. You are an awesome Wikipedian! Prhartcom (talk) 06:41, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My mention of your wonderful JSB articles on the Noye's Fludde PR page was, in my typically duplicitous English way, both wholeheartedly sincere and simultaneously a cunning snare to lure you into the peer review. But I see my crafty schemes were unnecessary and you are on the case already. I wish I could feel comfortable about reviewing your GAN Bach articles, but you understand, I'm sure, that as a Gerda fan I feel not quite as detached as a good GA reviewer should be! With respectful greetings, Tim. Tim riley talk20:14, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the snare ;) - I will read and comment, but have two other articles waiting first. Did you see that I created one off Noye which was a red link off my very first article? (Almost exactly 5 years ago, as my user's infobox told me, - I would have missed it otherwise.) - If you hesitate about Bach, there's my Strauss dream also, and a hymn which Bach used, but that's a different story. Btw, on various pages I claimed that the infobox war is history (a myth, over), what do you think? Look at Chopin above, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The text was copied from the German Wikipedia, but commented out, not shown. I have never seen the source found by the bot. The German text is removed now, and the translation noted on the talk page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda. Just noticed you referred to it once as Sonata quasi una Fantasia. That's one title we shouldn't be using, as it applies to No. 13, Op. 27/1, as well. Cheers, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 13:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to use ot as a title (see the 2012 discussion). I mentioned it because that was something important to Beethoven, while I don't know what he would think of "Moonlight" ;) - As also in the discussion: we can't form a single correct sentence using "Moonlight" until that phrase was coined. (I am afraid we still don't know when it first appeared in English, only know when some critic wrote that the music it reminded HIM of Mondschein on the lake, - as POV as it can get.) - However, that is true also for the Flying Dutchman. At least we cleaned Wagner and the bottom navbox from that nonsense during the FAC ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Inkpot Madonna has this ... the sculpture was restored by Roksana Jachim in the workshop of the Klosterkammer Hannover. As a computer tomography revealed problems in the colour and wood. Was the tomography done and when it revealed the problems they decided to do the restoration or was it done as part of the process of the restoration? Belle (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They wanted to do the restoration (plenty of time while the cathedral was closed) and used the tool, - you are welcome to investigate and become a contributor, plenty of sources, - RL for me today, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:04, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 10 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Klesie Kelly, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Klesie Kelly, soprano and academic voice teacher in Cologne, recorded love songs for voices and instrumental soloists with tenor Ian Partridge? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Klesie Kelly. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:33, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In belated response to your efforts at Franz Kafka, my favourite author, and also for your kindness in telling other editors (i.e. me) that they are valued, I grant you this barnstar! Thanks very much for doing what you do. RGloucester — ☎02:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Inkpot Madonna
I moved the reference in the article because I was reviewing it for DYK. I have now approved the nomination at DYK but will have to reverse that if the references stay as they now are. I also tweaked the hook, - you had better make sure you approve the change I made. Properly speaking I should have suggested my version as ALT1 but I could see the nomination needed prompt approval if it was to on the front page on Aug 15th. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I would put the two references at the end of the sentence because between them they reference all the facts. If you have one reference part way through, it infers that the second reference refers only to the last part of the sentence, which, in this case is not true. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, please don't edit this right now, I'm using Visual Editor, which doesn't have true section editing ... so I'll have to revert your edit and go to some trouble to reinstate mine. Quick question: did you see the template at the top of the page? If not, then it might be a good idea for me to create an edit notice when I use VE, as well as templating the page (until the devs get the section editing fixed). - Dank (push to talk) 19:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. betafive05:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I simply wanted to ask if a term like that (given in quotation marks, because it is a quote, - I would never ever say such a thing myself) would be "readily identifiable" as "'Offensiveness' of speech". - English is not my first language, I need simple language, - if you can help to word the question better, you are welcome. - Visit my user page: "Every editor is a human being.", - I like that idea enough to quote it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I apologize for taking offense when none was intended. You'll have to forgive me-- I think "incredibly toxic personality" is an offensive thing to call someone, and as someone who's been described as-such, I'm perhaps oversensitive to it. Cheers! betafive06:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Betafive: I think it was Jimbo who used that phrase in his Wikimania speech. He also visited my talk page to tell me that I needed "more honor", which went down like a lead balloon with quite a few people. - Sitush (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, here actually. To be fair, he did sort of retract it when he came under some pressure a few days later. He still seemed to think that he was right but he also said that "I want you to continue editing here", as if he has some sort of control over that. "This edit is provided to you courtesy of a decree of Jimmy Wales" or whatever. - Sitush (talk)
Yep, Jimbo himself said it and it was widely believed that he was directing it at a specific individual not named here. Gerda and I are among those who did not approve. Gerda would never call someone that. Montanabw(talk)19:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda! Thank you for your kind comment about Puankhequa at Philg88's talk page. I was just as surprised about your editing the bracket as I was with a Bot message that followed. I counted the brackets time and time again and I just could not figure it out where the "single" bracket was. Totally mystified! Then I realized that the very first bracket was not written in roman letters but in Chinese "letters", and therefore the Bot did not recognize it as a bracket and ignored it. So it depended on what rendering support your computer had. I could clearly see two brackets (and all the Chinese characters) but when I looked at the page on another computer, obviously similar to yours without Chinese characters, one bracket was gone and replaced with a blank square. So, from that point of view, your edit was perfectly fine. I have now replaced both brackets with brackets from the roman (English) alphabet and all is well again. :) So thank you, you acted in good faith, it was just the "machines" misleading us both. Poor Philg88, he must be encountering this problem all the time. All the best, w.carter-Talk19:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to remove an extra space, but may have removed a bracket accidentally, - no harm. Look above, people leaving because "civility" is demanded by incivility, that's a different problem. Nice to meet you, and I still think your article would be good for DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to meet you too. You seem civil enough for me. :) The spaces around the Chinese characters can be tricky = non-existent. I am still something of a newbie here at the English Wikipedia (and I am being gently and expertly coached by Philg88, who has the patience of a saint) so DYK's are a bit outside my learning curve right now. But I like cooperation (I never regard articles as "mine"), so if anyone else is interested in doing one, I am totally ok with it. I have noticed that some users make DYK's of almost anything. I'll get to the DYK's eventually. In a couple of months or so. :) Best, w.carter-Talk19:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Civility: I only quoted someone ;) - I am one of these people who make DYK of everything, - someone introduced me for my first article without asking me. I'll do that to you, and you just watch, learn if you like, ignore if not ;) - I have to know which article are "mine" because I am a sanctioned criminal and may add infoboxes only to "my" articles, those I created (turning red link to blue), not those I get DYK credit for because I expanded. Kafkaesque, well, see my user infobox ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with Kafkaesque. :) Please do a DYK of this here new article if you like, Fräulein Kriminelle, I will certainly watch. It is a very good way to learn: Observe and imitate until you achieve enlightenment, or as other have put it: Fake it 'till you make it. Cheers, w.carter-Talk20:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done, and added to the article talk, for everybody interested. Please add projects there! You can add better hooks to the nomination, preceded by ALT1: etc. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, move along, that's quite enough friendly collaborative editing, thank you. This is Wiki-bleedin-pedia. Please fulfil your obligations by getting involved in some kind of ridiculous arguement (preferably with each other) within 2 business days, or else. (That's a very nice article you have, there. It would be a shame if something happened to it...) --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
California Chrome is now a featured article! Can you add it to the appropriate spots at QAI? I think I'd like to try and have it be TFA for the 2015 Kentucky Derby next May too. Montanabw(talk)23:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to say that I didn't mean that I was unwilling to move your hook - I just wanted to make it clear what the consequences of moving it would be. NB: I'm told that chocolate has zero calories. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, so far I didn't even notice anything ;) - Laura Fürst is nicely progressing in the German DYK, followed by the Lambananas. Thanks for the sweets! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:11, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for translating Laura Fürst! Do let me know when it runs. I wish you had been there to see Annabel Breuer's reaction to being on the front page. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Gerda. I'm still here from time to time, but I do not seem to find much time for WP in the summer. I couldn't make out from your message who you meant: I looked at the table and most of the ticks were in place... Moonraker (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Got him! Strange how things can be invisible. "As I was going down the stair / I met a man who wasn't there. / He wasn't there again today..." And no doubt this is the End which awaits us all. "Golden girls and boys all must / Like chimney-sweepers, come to dust." Moonraker (talk)
A super article, congratulations! I loved the image of Gerd Heinrich rolling in stinging nettles to prepare for his expedition. He must surely have rolled naked? Moonraker (talk) 16:56, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox wars and pieces
The infobox wars will continue until a few minds start to open up to the real solution. Tying infoboxes to metadata was a fundamental mistake that too many infobox warriors are unprepared to admit to. The obvious solution is for all infoboxes to be generated automatically from Wikidata, and users to be given the option to see them, not to see them, or even only to see them, perhaps accompanied by a micropedia-style lead. Simple. But it won't happen of course, because some would have to admit that they'd been riding the wrong horse. EricCorbett22:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The wars were mentioned in 2005. I don't see any in 2014, but I may be blind. Look above for the names of some people known to love or hate them, all talking to each other. I was named a warrior once, - that was for repair after an edit war, weeks later. I deny the wars ;) - I simply believe that for example Carmen would be more attractive and informative like this. - See also, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I remember some quite recently, over articles such as the Pendine Museum of Speed for instance. But there's no reason why you and I should have to see the same version of any page as readers. If you like infoboxes then have one. If I don't, then why should I have to see your preferred version? Thought ought to be given to a micropedia version of every page, based on Wikidata plus the article lead. Nothing else makes sense.
On a separate issue and in light of recent events, have you ever felt that I treated you differently or less respectfully because you're a female? Just curious. EricCorbett22:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't remember the museum, looked it up and saw that the most recent edits were in 2013. - I asked about 2014 ;) - I told our arbitrators that the infobox war was over in 2012, last "battle" Cosima Wagner. - You always treated me well, as I keep telling people, - how would I know if that is different - if it is - because I am female or because I am I? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:53, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I looked. Define spat, which seems to be much less than a battle. What I see with my limited view (reading diffs is a difficult art) is that Andy made one edit in the history of that article, on 14 February 2014: uncollapsing an infobox (an act of love on Valentine's Day?). - Of course, uncollapsing an infobox and putting it in the normal position IS a reason to be banned, as we know from Teh Case. (Reading diffs is a difficult art.) - Back to your initial question: in the following (longish) MOS discussion, wasn't it mentioned that readers can opt out seeing infoboxes? I didn't follow because I want to see them. - Further on memory lane, did you see that Andreas Scholl was improved since you helped me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda
I probably should have reverted the IP edit at Maria Callas instead of requesting citations. Would you have a look at its history, and if you think it best, restore the version prior to the IP edit? Thank you.—John Cline (talk) 06:51, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You do it, please. I reverted nonsense like that once, just before, and am on a self-imposed 1RR rule (see above, perhaps you can get behind my petition ;) ), on top of having left project opera, to not disturb them further. Funny enough, I am the one who supplied most of the recent DYK articles for the project, one a day in the last three days ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I will, and understand your reluctance. I'm sorry if I've opened an old wound. I happened to notice your edit in the article's recent history, and I fully trust your judgement. I'll look at your petition directly. I feel confident I'll find myself in support of it. Cheers.—John Cline (talk) 07:49, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! No wound, - we celebrated Verdi's birthday together, last November, and we get along well, I simple try not to get in conflict. I believe that most operas would be more attractive with an infobox instead of a navbox that is redundant to a better one on the bottom, but don't waste time doing missionary work. I occasionally ask, though ;) - The link to the petition is on top of my user, if you don't want to read the (sort of related) discussion right above, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, dear Gerda! I am in the strange position of having two articles up for FAC at the moment, both as co-nom. I don't imagine John Gielgud is of compelling interest, but I wonder if you might find it pleasing to drop in chezJules Massenet. Quite understand if he doesn't appeal, naturally. Respectful hugs, Tim riley talk20:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for another invitation, while I didn't even turn to the Fludde, other than creating an article for it. The strange things I do instead include telling an arbitrtor as gently as I can (phrase borrowed from George Ponderevo) to check premises, and our founder about, - well how would you call it? I also had three singers on DYK on three consecutive days, - a bit strange after I left project opera to avoid being its troublemaker ;) - Did you see above that a Bach cantata was made GA today? Now the reviewer starts to fill its red links ;)
I did indeed see BVW 12 promoted. I itch to review your GA nominations, but you can understand that as secretary to the Gerda Fan Club I feel inhibited from so doing. It was a salutary excursion for me today to engage in the FAC for Fluorine. I didn't understand a word of it, but nobody could imagine I was favouring dear colleagues! Tim riley talk20:42, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Nice club idea, after I was seen in the infobox warrior club, which I don't know. Above, I said that I don't know of an infobox battle in 2014, - how about you? My fans could perhaps tell the arbs that they don't think I need a restriction to behave? Actually, Andy the same. - What do think about my thoughts about learning? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
... only that the sad reason is that I am a fan of the missing photographer, - it's the most cheerful way I can deal with another terrible loss for the project, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I created the above article recently. I want to nominate it for DYK along with the actors' articles. Till now, I have 5x expanded Gertrude Welcker, Ernst Deutsch, Olga Limburg,Josef Peterhans, Maria Forescu and Fritz Delius (actor). Including all of these the nom will be a 7-articles one. The deadline is 19 August. I will expand Eduard von Winterstein and Paul Bildt and hopefully create the non-existent articles by translating the corresponding ones from German Wikipedia. Does this source provide any additional info beside what the film article currently has?
Just returning, will look around before looking deeper into this, but do you have a particular reason to have them all in one hook, instead of spreading the goodness on seven? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
...that (...actors names...) acted in (film's title) - the film was refused (or rejected) premiere by the British Board of Film Classification in 1921 on grounds of prostitution depicted in the film?
Most of the sources are German. You can use the source to create an article on the play. I am unable to translate the page using Google translate. Thanks--Skr15081997 (talk) 11:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am too busy right now for extra articles, sorry. - the hook is great without any actor, why not give every actor a personal line instead of being just part of a list. - IF you do it anyway, please don't list them all in the nomination's name. just the film. The watchlists will thank you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know you do other stuff too, but I seem to see your name most often on user talkpages, invariably offering some kindly and poetic words of encouragement. Figured it's worth letting you have some of the same, although I'm no poet:
Gerda, thanks for being nice,
Dank für betragen nicht mörderische.
This week I had a lot of other things to do.
I will for sure update the pages of Bruckner's Quartet and Quintet next week, e.g.,adding a section "Versions and editions" and seeing for a split for the Alternative Rondo and the Intermezzo.
There is an avid discussion going on in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera about the legitimity of info boxes as an (legitimate) alternative to composer templates. I do not know your opinion but I would be very grateful if you could/would participate in the discussion as I have great admiration for your knowledge and your style. Thanks in any case, and best greetings after a wonderful evening with Fierrabras.--Meister und Margarita (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Es ist schade um die Menschen." A Quote from Dream Play by Strindberg. All these efforts, so much harm. Makes me really sad. Rethinking myself, thanking you and still hoping, --Meister und Margarita (talk) 08:59, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ö1 broadcasted on 22 August the premiere of the "Urfassung" of Symphony No. 1 (Röder's edition, conductor: C. Meister), which was performed on 26 July at the Salzburger Festspiele. Shortly after it was put on YouTube.[53] I discussed with Hans and John whether it actually was a premiere, because I heard no obvious difference with the "1866 Original unrevised Linz version" prepared by William Carragan in 1998, which Gerd Schaller used in Ebrach in July 2011 (See also my comment on YouTube). Röder is responsible for the update of the volume of the MWV dedicated to Symphony No. 1. John replied: "We will have to see what Röder writes in his forward. That new edition will be out soon. Carragan did his edition independently of the MWV. While it is unusual that they did not go to him, it is also not surprising." It would not be the first time that there is some personal rivalry among scholars...
The second part of the broadcast was devoted to Mass No. 2 (conductor: R. Huber). Unfortunately this performance used as commonly the "2. Fassung" of 1882. Shortly after it was also put on YouTube.[54]
Aloha. I would like to apologize in advance for interrupting your important work. This question will only take a moment of your time. The German archaeologist Roland Hampe published a small, 44 page book titled Die Stele aus Pharsalos im Louvre (1951).[55] However, according to OCLC, there is an online (e-book) version available.[56] Do you have any idea where I might be able to get a copy? The OCLC notes that the digital version was published by HathiTrust, but I am having trouble finding the book on their website.[57] I will keep looking if you don't have an answer. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 22:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I just realized the problem. Due to copyright restrictions, the e-book version is only available for the purpose of scanning, not for reading.[58] What a silly world we live in! Viriditas (talk) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Viriditas, excuse me for asking, but how can a book be available for scanning but not reading? I'm trying to imagine how you'd scan a work, but not glance at the pages? (NB: I'm not challenging your statement, but just fascinated by how that works in practice! Copyright law can be a strange beast...) Hchc2009 (talk) 19:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Archiving and letting it go
Hi Gerda. I had an email from Boing! Said Zebedee over the weekend, asking me to manually archive a section of his talk page, which you had been adding to regularly, perhaps to stop archiving? I'm concerned that the section in question includes a long quote from the infobox case - I'm certain it's not how he'd want to be immortalised. This Wikipedia equivalent of "thread bumping" is something I've seen before from you and I'm going to ask you to stop doing it on B!sZ's page (and preferably stop doing it all together) - he's trying to move away from the drama of Wikipedia, he's trying to focus on other things, I think he deserves the chance. WormTT(talk) 07:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it a "sad loss" when it was B's choice. Boing has been gone over a month now and it seems you don't respect that choice - especially since you just made another edit to the talk page. Clerical or not it isn't needed. MarnetteD|Talk06:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is sad for me. My one (and last) edit was prepared when I translated an article right when he left, my way of letting go. It takes a while to reach the German Did you know section and happened today. The edit is factual information, like these flowers three years later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone has an excuse. Your last post is still more than a month after Boing chose to leave and many many hours after Worm asked you to stop - which was based on a request by Boing himself. Can't you honor anyone's requests? MarnetteD|Talk06:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gosh darn it - I should have said that my experience of your editing here shows that you have a heart as big as all out doors on at least 4 continents. You deserve all sorts of praise for that. OTOH when it causes problems for another person you might want to reign it in no matter how long ago the initial event was. Apologies for all the offense I have caused you. MarnetteD|Talk07:07, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I've just removed a "warning" as I was a little confused about the timeline. Without the "warning" though, I'm reminding you publicly what you have been told privately, don't post on Boing! Said Zebedee's talk page again. On a different tack, I see you've been posting similar items to a lot of peoples talk pages - why don't you ask those people how they feel about your posts of this nature? I for one find them infuriating and I think you might find a fair number agree with me. I understand you mean well and the difference may be cultural - so asking the question may be the best idea. WormTT(talk) 11:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Gerda. I just wanted to point out that the "works cited/sources" section is considered a separate section wikiwide (as opposed to subsection of "citations/references") and (apart from very few exceptions) is marked as a level 2 heading [59]. The only other way is to have a level 2 heading called "Notes and references" and have two level 3 headings called "Notes" and "References", respectively, below it. --Omnipaedista (talk) 06:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This Wikipedia convention reflects the convention employed in most printed academic publications according to which the last two sections of an article/book are called "Citations/references" and "Works cited", respectively. --Omnipaedista (talk) 06:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner's Mass No. 3 - Versions and editions
Dear Gerda,
I have recently have a discussion with Hans Roelofs concerning the various versions and editions of Bruckner's Mass No. 3. The situation is nearly even complex as that of some Bruckner's symphonies... See my comment on the comment page of the Mass.
For Mass No. 2 there are clearly two different versions (1866 and 1882), which have both been issued by Nowak. For Mass No. 1 there one version edited by Nowak, but it is not clear on which manuscript(s) it is based: 1864 or 1882?
I will now review the pages String Quintet (Bruckner) and String Quartet (Bruckner) and try to put again a second infobox on them. It is not always obvious to add something to a page which was originally edited by somebody else. There is only one version/edition of the Quartet and its alternative Rondo, but two versions/editions of the Quintet and its Intermezzo. Therefore I will also add a section "Versions and editions".
Thank you! Traveling and online only sporadically. I noticed this morning that more recent sources put the composition date of BWV 120 at 1742 instead of the late 1720s, which makes it a parody of BWV 120a, not the other way round, - major changes to several articles. I am happy that the list of Bach cantatas is sortable ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:46, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, have read the whole thread. My view is different; there are many content writers who ensure they take up only those administrative areas that are related to content writing and that don't take away the pleasure of/from volunteering. And I would recommend you go for the RfA. If you're on for it, I'll continue on email. If not, no issues. Best regards. WifioneMessage08:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FYI
Please, I'm very curious and I hope you will oblige by answering the questions I ask you in Pigsonthewing's page.
I said there that you ask too much.
You never answered the question I posted for you, on Pigsonthewing's page[60] where we were having a conversation regarding your many posts on blocked/banned users' pages as well as on those of ArbCom members and other highly active editors, and the way you regularly update those pages in a hidden manner. I was worried that all those people get an orange message banned which could be irritating, though I'm not sure if they do get the orange flash when your post is so hidden and the bot doesn't notice that you haven't signed or dated your update.
Also, you never answered my other questions there, such as your reasons for always supporting Pingsonthewing with irrelevant reasons such as the two afcs when you support Pigsonthewing, your reason was per Andy's reason that "consistency. This stub doesn't hurt WP." And another of Pigsonthewing you supported with: Keep BBC is an independent source. It would be undue weight to merge this article to the series article. (Did you know that we keep an article about a fictional opera)? Why not this person who probably was real?)--Gerda Arendt".
I would greatly appreciate a direct answer. If there is something you don't understand, rather than giving me a round-about answer with irrelevant links to things you are promoting, could you just ask me to clarify? Thanks! Parabolooidal (talk) 15:59, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Parabolooidal, Gerda is under no obligation whatsoever to answer you, and reading your posts, the thing that popped into my mind was WP:DFTT. And no, PSky is not banned or blocked, neither is Boing! They both left voluntarily due to the ongoing harassment and bullying of tendentious editors. We at QAI let Gerda maintain the page because she's the best at doing it, and the PumpkinSKy prize is her own, so of course she ca do with it as she sees fit. Now I am going to give you some advice: go away and don't bother her here. Montanabw(talk)19:11, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like ther is a misunderstanding here. The "pointed silence" was used by Scott to remove six Gerda's post from his page. Since Scott's failed to answer any of Gerda's six posts ("pointed silence"), I think the reference "pointed silence" means that Scott's ignoring Gerda's posts did no good so the six posts were removed. I think Gerda's friends should help this editor out in understanding the English language. And Gerda, you're not on vacation, since you made about sixteen or so posts the day after your "vacation" statement.
Also, User:Montanabw, you misunderstand also. If you look up a few threads in Gerda's page here, you'll see one called "Archiving and letting it go" where User:Worm That Turned makes comments about Gerda's continuing to post on blocked editor User talk:Boing! said Zebedee, after Boing! requested that she stop,[62] and says these continued posts on people's pages seems like "thread bumping" to prevent archiving. After Gerda posted again on Boring!, Worm gave her a more specific warning[63]. Then he offers a suggestion[64] that Gerda ask those many users if they want the continuing these type of posts on their pages. He says "I for one find them infuriating and I think you might find a fair number agree with me.[65]
The "point" of the pointed silence is to demonstrate that the person maintaining the silence has no interest in the topic. I suggest you take the hint, Parabolooidal, and live with the disappointment of not having your questions answered. Belle (talk) 17:27, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Parabolooidal, you're not the only person who is puzzled by Gerda's constant unsolicited posts to various talk pages. When I was researching infoboxes for the Signpost's Arbitration Report, I was told privately that quite a few users were freaked out by her apparent non-sequiturs and constant off-topic references to infoboxes. It seems that she does not understand English well, and is always either answering the wrong thing or going off topic, or asking people to explain meanings of things she doesn't understand in English. Someone should probably point her to the Simple Wikipedia. The subjects themselves are not simple, but the vocabulary is much easier to understand.
If you look at a small edit like this one it is probably typical of the ones she makes daily to high profile pages. Since I still have most of the arbs' talk pages watchlisted, I see these all the time. This particular arb's talk page is watchlisted by over 200 users, so every time she makes some small change to point people some music score she has updated on her user page, all of these people see it. You have to realize too, that every time she makes one of these edits, it makes the user's orange notification box light up again and again and again, every day. She has easily made more trivial edits to the arb pages than even Kumioko at the height of his trolling.
Unfortunately, every time someone tries to tell Gerda what a problem this can be, she gets really upset. She doesn't want to realize that although some people enjoy her comments, other people are really upset by them, and don't know what to do. —Neotarf (talk) 17:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, you didn't. The very first message on this page is by a user who just had his user page deleted and only restored it to say "retired". Makes me sad. The second message I keep mentions Mathew Townsend who did several great GA reviews. Sad. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good news: the banner is gone, he wants to grow a thicker skin. Look above for "hard heart". I am on vacation means that I have very limited time and want to use it for content, such as dealing with a GA review and the Bruckner article split topic (see below). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:12, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was going to say he has been busy. (See here.). He asked someone to block him for two weeks, but that block is over. I suppose school is starting and his parents want him to study instead of being on the computer all the time. Sometimes people have a page deleted so no one can read what was on it before.
Grave of Ernst Roth (1896-1971) in Twickenham Cemetery, London, UK.
Hi Gerda. That photo of Ernst Roth's gravestone is now uploaded. I've put a thumbnail here. You may want to crop it down a bit before using in an article. Please use as you see fit, and apologies for taking so long to get round to uploading it. Not quite eight months, but still a long time. Hopefully better late than never. Carcharoth (talk) 00:04, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!
. . ...
colourful image in hope last song of silence
Our colleague Nikkimaria has again counteracted my changes.
In the String Quartet, she has made a split, i.e., removing the info about the Rondo in C minor and putting some content on it in Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) - a page I had also created in the past as redirect to String Quartet.
In the String Quintet, she is presumably also intended for making a split. She has removed the info about the Intermezzo. I guess she will also put some content on it in Intermezzo (Bruckner) - a page I had created in the past as redirect to String Quintet.
She has blanked Intermezzo (Bruckner) and redirected it to a short, new page Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner) with a content based on only two references she had found on internet (AllMusic and the leaflet of one of the CDs) - as she also did for Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) - ignoring the content I had put on Intermezzo (Bruckner) and the relevant info I had retrieved on it in van Zwol's 782 pages anthology.
Even more lovely, I read the nomination and was quite moved about the mention of Sanddunes Sunset, - you may know that my never-to-be-changed user pic is named Sanddunes Sunrise. Look at the links to the image ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Interested yes, time no, many other projects. Start a stub, that's what I do these days, started in March with women, several that need to filled. The Magnificat needs a lot more attention before we perform 3 October, hopefully in harmony ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For your info:Hans Roelofs, who is responsible for the discography of Bruckner's non-orchestral works, has in the meantime had an independent look on the pages String Quartet (Bruckner), Rondo in C minor (Bruckner), String Quintet (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner). He thereafter e-mailed the following reaction to me: "Wanneer iemand zoals jij, die je sporen al bij Wikipedia heeft verdiend, dan een lemma schrijft over een onderwerp dat relevant is en binnen het Wikipedia-Bruckner-concept past, heeft dan iemand anders het recht dat tegen te houden? Wordt die betreffende user door de redactie gewaarschuwd?" (Translation: "When someone like you, who has already won his spurs by Wikipedia, writes a lemma which is relevant and suits the Wikipedia-Bruckner-concept, has someone else the right to hold it? Has the concerned user got a warning from the Wikipedia redaction?"). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:29, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The replier doesn't see the problem(s) yet. You possibly have to be more explicit about the quality of the sources (and yes, Wikipedia doesn't consider self-published reliable), the style, and the question if a split was a good idea. Perhaps make a timeline of events of one split, or at least point to the discussions on the talk pages. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:17, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: The replier is also right that arbitration is used on Wikipedia for a specific process that I recommend to avoid, - I think mediation or discussion would serve your purpose better, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you tell the other party who didn't edit today? (Some users are on strike on Mondays.) I never tried formal mediation, so will be of not much help, but watching. I was strongly advised to stay away of everything that smells like infobox, even remotely ;) - Back from rehearsal, and guess what we sang: a Missa in F (mentioned today in the naming conventions)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you replied to Francix, I wonder whether the mediation, as it is currently set, would succeed. I think that it can only succeed if a third independent party, which is a "Bruckner-expert", can also participate, provided (of course) Nikkimaria accepts to participate in the mediation. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, both, I will keep dreaming ;) - the article appeared on DYK, see top of my 2014 archive,
Übersetzung
Hallo Frau Arendt, nach dem deutschen Original-Text im "Traum"- Artikel folgen zwei Übersetzungsvarianten für den ersten Vers, nicht für den Lied-Titel wie angegeben. Ist das ein Versehen oder verstehe ich da was nicht? Radulf (talk) 20:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
P. S. Das Datum der Lyrikanthologie kann nicht stimmen, weil Jost Hermand 1904 noch nicht auf Erden weilte. Ich dann das aber gerne richtigstellen.--Radulf (talk) 12:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A quick Google search show clear signs of notability; I will add some sources and cites when we get to that point. Currently, my to-do list says that Wilhelm Keitel and Animal welfare during World War II is my priority. Keitel's article has literlaly not one valid, reliable source, but I have a lots, so promised to do some work on that article. Animal welfare is an article I originally started, but was moved to user page because per discussion consensus and will first be a real article again when I prove it's notability and standard. Those two subjects will most likely swallow up my wiki time for tonight, but I'm uber ready tomorrow. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:40, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda Arendt/2014! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia.
If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement!
Thank you, I am watching there and the other related pages, no need to repeat ;) - If the text is going to be part of the mediation, a translation would help, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria does not want to participate to the proposed mediation, because "As this dispute does not currently meet the prerequisites for mediation, this filing is not appropriate at this time. These articles were created not even a week ago and discussion is ongoing on the talk pages, where Meneerke or other parties are welcome to participate if they so choose". Which next step would you suggest? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 16:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am watching ;) - You don't have to repeat anything here. - Go to one talk page, such as Intermezzo, and break things up in easy questions, one at a time. My experience: if you ask Nikkimaria two questions, she will leave one unanswered, always the one you are more concerned about ;) - Our agreement is more than a year old, I learned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. My position: Intermezzo should have an infobox, as all other Bruckner compositions. The topic should define the style, as a service to our readers, not the particular dislike of one editor (which is also called ownership). - Now I am restricted not to restore deleted infoboxes, and even if not, I have an agreement with Nikkimaria which is based on ownership but is better than edit war. YOU have no such restrictions and agreements, you could restore the infobox and find support for doing so. You could also ask for support first on the article talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:22, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Although indeed non absolutely necessary, I thus appeared logical to me to create a separate template {{Bruckner chamber music}}, so that the reader immediately can see which other pages are existing in the concerned genre without consulting the global template - also as, e.g., Nikki do not accept the connection from the Quintet to the Intermezzo, or that from the Quartet to the Rondo. I think both are thus useful. In that genre "Chamber music" is only Abendklänge (WAB 110), a short piece for violin and piano, missing.
NB: There is still work to do in the future: other wiki-pages could indeed be also created for the motets (about 40 items), the piano and organ music (13 items), and the Weltliche Lieder und Chöre (about 40 items)... As you know, I have at least one recording of all Bruckner's works in their different versions and editions, except the three earlier name-day cantatas and 12 Weltliche Chöre, of which no commercial or (known) private recording is currently available. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would understand a separate template for 40 motets, as we have one for 200+ Bach cantatas, but something extra to open for just handful of items, - I don't need it, - but it's your field ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda Arendt/2014! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject Women writers, an outreach effort which aims at improving articles about women writers on Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thank you!
Few infoboxes have recording information, - I pick my "battles" ;) - More important to have an infobox for the Rondo and Ecce sacerdos magnus, - I can't help with that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Assume she is not. Restore the material, add to it and if she deletes, just do exatly the same thing she does - don't do a straight revert, revert with continued improvements. Montanabw(talk)05:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See my mea culpa on the talk page of the Intermezzo - Nobody is infallible! As integer scientist and physician I always admit my mistakes and revert them - and my updates on the page Intermezzo. Are there OK for you? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A merge proposal could win consensus if the main article had more discussion of the other movements, so it stayed balanced. I like infoboxes. This article is part of a series, and readers should get a consistent experience. See Help:Infobox – "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article. Whether to include an infobox, which infobox to include, and which parts of the infobox to use, is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." The "main editor" does not have any special say. I am not qualified to judge the sources. I am generally suspicious of websites, but they may be good. I would not remove citations of sources that seem reliable. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? I am not the one to allow or not ;) - There are many articles to which you could add that, including many of Bach's works. For 3 or more projects, consider to use {{bannershell}}, for example on the talk of Graham Waterhouse. You could also add the infobox on the talk of BWV 138 to the article, if you agree with me that it improves Wikipedia. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As proposed I have added the banner "Christianity" to the other motets.
In the meantime I have also found another motet Afferentur regi, to which I have also put a banner and added a suggestion for the discography.
Consider to write some yourself. Minimum standard should be a lik to the score and a translation of the title. (I added those to the ones I accidentally discovered when I looked for a link to Virga Jesse floruit.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I will do it. For your info, herewith my own selection of the Motets ('faithful' recordings in chronological order):
Pange lingua (1. Fassung), WAB 31 – H. Baumgartner (YouTube). No other recording available
Libera me (I), WAB 21 – T. Kerbl
Asperges me, WAB 4 – N. Tanaka (Bruckner Archive). No other recording available
Asperges me (äolisch), WAB 3.1 – E. Ortner
Asperges me F-Dur, WAB 3.2 – G.M. Cavallo (YouTube, with a lot of noise). Other 'faithful' recording: N. Tanaka (Bruckner Archive)
Tantum Ergo D-Dur, WAB 32 – E. Ortner
Tantum Ergo A-Dur, WAB 43 – J. Brown
Dir, Herr, dir will ich mir ergeben, WAB 12 – T. Kerbl
O du liebes Jesu Kind, WAB 145 – R. Frieberger
Herz-Jesu-Lied, WAB 144 – T. Kerbl
Vier Tantum Ergo (1. Fassung), WAB 41 – T. Kerbl
Tantum ergo D-Dur (1. Fassung), WAB 42 – T. Kerbl
Zwei Aequale, WAB 114 & 149 – E. Ortner
In jener letzten der Nächte (1. Fassung), WAB 17 – R. Frieberger
In jener letzten der Nächte (2. Fassung), WAB 17 – T. Kerbl
Zwei Totenlieder, WAB 47-48 – D. Ferguson
Libera me (II), WAB 22 – M. Best
Tantum Ergo B-Dur, WAB 44 – T. Kerbl
Ave Maria (I), WAB 5 – P. Fiala
Ave Maria (II), WAB 6 – E. Ortner
Afferentur regi, WAB 1 – E. Ortner
Pange lingua (phrygisch), WAB 33 – E. Ortner
Inveni David, WAB 19 – M. Flämig
Iam lucis orto sidere (mixed), WAB 18 – R. Jones
Locus iste, WAB 23 – E. Ortner
Christus factus est (II), WAB 10 – R. Luna
Tota pulchra es, WAB 46 – E. Ortner
Os Justi (+ Versus-Choral), WAB 30 – D. Ferguson
Ave Maria (III), WAB 7 – R. Frieberger
Christus factus est (III), WAB 11 – E. Ortner
Salvum fac populum, WAB 40 – R. Jones
Veni creator, WAB 50 – J. Brown
Ecce sacerdos, WAB 13 – P. Fiala
Virga Jesse, WAB 52 – E. Ortner
Iam lucis orto sidere (3. Fassung), WAB 18 – D. Ferguson
Ave regina caelorum, WAB 8 – R. Shewan
Vier Tantum Ergo (2. Fassung), WAB 41 – P. Fiala
Tantum ergo D-Dur (2. Fassung), WAB 42 – E. Ortner
The general point I'd try to make however is that neither you nor I are native English speakers. We don't have a natural feeling on how it is done from education etc. So we'd need to see a lot, read a lot, compare a lot. Then take into account that even English speakers may differ, even more than is apparent from WP:ENGVAR. And what I do (as I've been active on some naming conventions guidelines) is to try derive some coherent guidance from that.
After I had rewritten the WP:NCM guideline I discovered the War Requiem vs. Missa Brevis difference on the Boosey & Hawkes website. Well, happy that I apparently got it right.
I'm not completely sure about Magnificat/Magnificat. For the last half hour I've been googeling (also google books), and really seems like people who write about these compositions in English don't have a consistent view on this. Of course I'd do Deutsches Magnificat (non-generic) but Magnificat as a separate composition appears both italiced and not italicized. But then I found Missa brevis too. I'd keep to "Magnificat" as a generic composition title (like "Missa brevis") for now, not italicized. --Francis Schonken (talk) 07:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for investigating! I like Magnificat better than Magnificat, but my personal liking is not enough of a reason. I read and compared and saw that we have Magnificat, and copied from there. I also remember some rule/guideline (forgot where) to italicise all foreign language terms that are no proper names. I wonder about Italian aria titles being "proper names", and kind of liked tonus peregrinus, separating it visually from the preceding link. Missa brevis (a common term describing a type of compositions), Missa Brevis (a single work), I would say. Magnificat is borderline, because - like Requiem - it's a Latin incipit which became an English term for a type. Can you talk to the Magnificat people? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(e.c.) An article title that has similar issues is Stabat Mater: here the main article is not italicized (unlike Magnificat). For the compositions, I like it better the way it is done at Stabat Mater (Dvořák) than the way it is done at Stabat Mater (Pergolesi), but with the same caveat: I have no native speaker feeling on this.
Yes, I'd like it to be more uniform across Wikipedia, but don't know whether I can help it much.
Re. Magnificat being a proper name: yes it is a proper name. I read the proper name guidance too (it is here), yesterday, after I had de-italicized tonus peregrinus. That foreign words/proper name guidance seems like the sort of unhelpful vagueness we don't need right now. But true, I was too quick on tonus peregrinus.
I'm not going to challenge Boosey and Hawkes on Britten's Missa Brevisnot being italicized.
Don't know whether the "incipit" reasoning is of value here. Might be. I'll try to explore that route.
Thank you. Boosey and Hawkes are accustomed to a capital Brevis, even for the type, but I am not going to challenge them ;) (We don't go by what publishers do, anyway, or we would have A Boy was Born.) Magnificat people? Sloppy for the talk of Magnificat. I would like to know why they have it italic because I like consistency. Nunc dimittis? Stabat Mater? Trickier than Magnificat, because you don't recognize it easily in text, being more than one word. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For comparison, encyclicals like Rerum Novarum are named after their incipit too, and italicized.
Nonetheless, I'd have it something like "Composition titles that are incipits and have been put to music by several composers are usually regarded as generic titles, and so not italicized" + some relevant examples in the WP:NCM guideline. What do you think? --Francis Schonken (talk) 08:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Would you see Nunc dimittis in that category. It's easy to see (as a title) when linked, but not in text. Can we perhaps distinguish lists, tables, infoboxes - no italics necessary - from text where optional italics might help understanding? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Composition titles that are incipits and have been put to music by several composers are usually regarded as generic names, and so not italicized, e.g. Stabat Mater (Dvořák), unless the composition belongs to an otherwise defined composition type like cantata, e.g. Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1.
The two Magnificat by Bach should be handled the same, it's the same music, more or less. It's not a Bach cantata in the sense of liturgical use after the sermon, but a cantata by the definition of what constitutes a cantata. Until yesterday, the piece in D was termed a motet, highly misleading. Let's say "Magnificat" - like Requiem - is almost a composition type itself, unless part of a larger piece, such as a vesper.
Side question: I am never sure if the parts of the mass (Kyrie, Gloria, ...) should be italic. What do you suggest? They are all just one word, recognizable as a title without italics. BWV 191 reminds me that I should link to Bach's Latin more ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:13, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at Bach's church music in Latin and corrected some and introduced a bit of feeling for the chronology: first ambitious Magnificat, late and unique Mass in B minor. I am not happy with the cantata and the Mass under the (too long) "parts of mass" heading, will look again later but perhaps you have ideas already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Re. former missa (Bach) article, yes my conversion to make it fit under the new page title was all but complete. For me too when I've some more time I'd be happy to collaborate, can still be improved further I think. Problems are for instance that the "Sanctus for six vocal parts and elaborate orchestral score for the Christmas service" of 1724, later incorporated in BWV 232, doesn't seem to have a separate BWV number, though the 1724 score has differences with what was added in BWV 232 quarter of a century later.
Thank goodness for you, Gerda; if it hadn't been for your hint, I wouldn't have known that I am supposed to submit to this TFAR thing (that I just finished) if I want to see my article on the main page. It pays to know smart people. Magnificent FA! Prhartcom (talk) 04:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your welcome a few days ago...
Hi Gerda. Thanks for your welcome a few days ago... and for your advice about patience. Yes. Patience is good. Luckily I am patient... with myself as well as with others. (Since I know what a clunk-head I can be, I sympathize when other people are clunk-heads too.) Anyway, I've been moving along with learning how to edit, and I've enjoyed spending time on Wikipedia. DimeBoxFrank (talk) 08:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to catch a glimpse at how I learned patience, look at the talk of Carmen, where I suggested something in June 2013 which was done 15 months later (while I did nothing) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I helped to compile the article on Janáček, so I'm curious ... and I can accept criticism :) --Vejvančický
The compilation is great, I would criticise just the lead, and it's not your fault, it's the general layout. I think that a reader first should know that the person pictured with a woman is a composer, and about what time, - only then details of pronunciation, alternate names. There's an easy solution, but not liked by Classical music ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:49, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. I don't fight the "infobox battle". Honestly, I have no opinion on that. Both ways work for me and for any intelligent person, I believe. When I look at the article it is clear to me in 1 or 2 seconds what it is about, with the infobox or without it. Thanks for your explanation, Gerda. With my best wishes - Antonín Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 14:35, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't fight any battle, but for me a listing with parameters is just easier to grasp. Look at Genghis Khan, - the lead is even more complicated, with Mongolian that doesn't show, but one glance to the right tells me something. I will have to understand why for composers that is not offered for people like me. Those who don't like it could opt out even to see it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:47, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reversion of my edit to Bach Cantata title "Da(r)zu ist erschienen der Sohn Gottes", BWV 40
Hello Gerda. I'm unclear on why you just reverted my edit to this title, which I explained both in the edit itself and on the talk page. Only wikipedia has this usual spelling. "Darzu" is meaningless, at least in Modern High German. Every other online source I found uses "Dazu". Please explain.
Jrgsf 20:41, 25 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrgsf (talk • contribs)
I explained it in the edit summary and on the article talk page. In addition, you should not change something related to the article name without changing the article name first. You can request to have an article moved to a new name and THEN change, if the request finds consensus. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
May
Brackett-bot loves you Braxckett.
May
Sogni =Vittorio Matteo Corcos - Dreams , 1896, Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Moderna, RomeHöfisches Fest in einem Lustgarten
Gerda, spring its blue band waves around, Frühlingsgefühle im September, how come? Thought you were about my indthusmiasmic article :) Serten (talk) 22:13, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kirche von Horn auf der Höri fehlt noch. ;) Yep.DYK. First review, too much climate and ecological history conflicts in the last time. Cheers. Serten (talk) 22:25, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My plans are secret ;) (I can give an infobx only to articles I create - and by create they don't mean a creative process but turning a red link to blue, - if I create a decent article from a one-line stub, that's not create, - therefore I avoid red links). I work on Locus iste. Want to find out if the chapel pictured is the chapel for which it was composed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful with too much secrete solemnity - our common liking O.J. Bierbaum on Stefan George: „Feierlich sein ist alles! Sei dumm wie ein Thunfisch, temperamentlos wie eine Qualle, stier besessen wie ein narkotisierter Frosch, aber sei feierlich, und du wirst plötzlich Leute um dich sehen, die vor Bewunderung nicht mehr mäh sagen können.“ ;) Serten (talk) 15:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I wouldn't mind having the same kind of infobox like THIS ONE, - same coliur, same size on painting and all of it. But it is in Russian... don't know how to make it English. I specially like the colour of it, it goes perfectly with the painting's own. Hafspajen (talk) 13:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you have seen, it is what I am doing, with long-lasting, strenuous, time-consuming discussions and eventually a not very positive outcome, because of Nikki's stiff-necked attitude.
Nikki has in the meantime drafted a few pages on Bruckner's motets, with, as you have seen, again the same kind of discussions and again a not very positive outcome.
Thanks for recreating that article, [68], I originally created this back in 2010 but someone saw fit to delete it. I don't know if there is something from the original article that could be useful but it couldn't hurt to ask. WCMemail15:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
With my edit summary readding the template ("apologize"), I mean(t) to say that I apologize, not that you should. So rather, "my apologies". Thanks for being on the lookout. Hyacinth (talk) 10:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Magnificat (Rutter) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 19:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget to add the two citations to the quotes in the third paragraph of the lead, as mentioned at the GAN review. I'd do it myself, but I have no idea how to make sfn work: I do my own referencing with a hammer and chisel, Stone-Age style. Tim riley talk17:53, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I may not add one, but can help. See what you understand of {{infobox song}} and {{infobox musical composition}}, and see what fits better. Move the image name (without prefix) to the appropriate parameter in the box, and the caption to the caption parmeter. Good luck, need sleep. - Can you help with this one (move it), - celebrating Kirchweih today by singing Monteverdi ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox poem was deleted, and the song one doesnt allwo pics, so you helped me a lot. I didnt get the hint with the move - where to? I would however support a sort of unified infobox scheme whereever you need me.
Vivant omnes virgines
Faciles, formosae.
Vivant et mulieres
Tenerae, amabiles,
Bonae, laboriosae.
Locus iste infobox to Locus iste (Bruckner). Dangerous. I didn't "create" the article, so say the rules, and I may not add an infobox to an article I didn't "create". However, I believe that I created the article, and most Bruckner composition articles have an infobox, - our readers don't object ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Don't drag me to far into that muddy pond. Dem Schweinen ist alles Schwein! I thought I remember a rather saulty italian leftist novel out of my youth with such a title, but I couldnt find it. Such where the days ;) Serten (talk) 15:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The first time I saw a countertenor, first not believing to hear him, was in Scotland. I wasnt aware of Scholl, great article! My last biography opus magnum is Reiner Grundmann, and I never would write a science bio without an infobox. Serten (talk) 17:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not ;) - by avoid bios, I meant bios of our list. Scholl was a long article when I met it, - it improved greatly with the help of friends and one of his harpsichordists, - look at the history which contains one of the edits I love best. - As for GA and infobox, not only are all my good articles graced with an infobox, but five of them were reviewed by users who don't particularly like them, namely Smerus, Dr. Blofeld and Tim riley. - Scholl stood almost next to me as a soloist of Bach's St Matthew Passion, - a lasting inspiration. When he sang He was despised, you would have heard a needle fall. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda, would you mind assessing the importance of Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172 for WikiProject Germany on the article's talkpage please? I know little about Bach cantatas, so wouldn't be able to judge their importance within German music and specifically on en-Wiki (I am just looking on some of the more notable or well-developed Germany-related articles, not going to assess 14.000+ stub articles). GermanJoe (talk) 17:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner's Locus iste is indeed becoming a "good" article. Unfortunately Nikki, who was somewhat calmed down, is again disputing about the Infobox, as a stubborn procedural barrister. Are there any means to let her stop it?
I am for sure willing to expand the discography, etc., but I am no more intended to again lose time with beating with her around the bush.
I think that there should be a separate discography for each of the three settings. The only CD with the three settings is that of Robert Shewan in 1991, but, as you can see on Hans' critical discography, it is absolutely not his first choice and also not my own first choice...
PS: The same would occur for Christus factus est. There are also 3 settings: WAB 9 (so-called by Grasberger, actually the gradual of the Messe für den Gründonnerstag), WAB 10 (the least known, for 8-voice choir, 3 trombones and string ad lib. - only two recordings: one fully a cappella by J. Brown [1997] and one "faithful" to the score by R. Luna [2013]), and WAB 11 (the most popular, as WAB 6 for the Ave Maria). For the Libera Me you have two settings: WAB 21 and WAB 22. For the Pange lingua also two settings: WAB 31 and WAB 33, and for Tantum ergo 8 settings: WAB 32 (wrongly called Pange lingua by Grasberger), WAB 41 (1-4), WAB 42, WAB 43 and WAB 44; some of them being in two versions ...
As there is one major Ave Maria, I would leave it as is. Christus factus est will be as good for Good Friday as Locus iste was for our Kirchweih ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a long-time reader. You're edits like on Rondo in C minor make things worse for readers. Readers don't get to choose what goes on a wikipedia page, as you just proved by reverting me. You have all the power. Not good for readers. You never hear from readers like me.
Long-time reader, please sign your posts. I reverted you ONCE. I don't do more than one revert. (You reverted twice.) Please discuss your point of view on the article talk page, where others spoke already. We have something here that is called consensus. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. My edits have been reversed and I am engaged in discussion at the talk page about my edits. The discussion might interest you. ____83d40m (talk) 02:06, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, for the note, for discussing, and for picking the iris, - showing exquisite taste. There's an unwritten law on Wikipedia that you may not know: don't change an article shown on the Main page (which went through a review process). There's a written law that you may not know: if your edit is reverted, don't revert again, go and discuss. You did it now ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why should I. redirects don't hurt ;) - I believe that the shorter name is better, - look a Wagner's stage works, some just name, some (opera), - may he not notice ;) - Ave Maria (Bruckner) looks fine to me, short and sweet covering WAB 6. Who knows WAB (as the IP said, blocked btw.)?
I moved back, also because of use in articles which would get needlessly complicated. If you think there should be an article covering all three, go ahead, write it. I feel that it is enough that they refer to each other in the lead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that what I did was shaky. You will perhaps find me a hairsplitter, but we have three different Ave Maria in Category:Motets by Anton Bruckner, and only one in {{Anton Bruckner}}. The other motets are currently placed in chronological order in {{Anton Bruckner}}. WAB 5 is also called "Ave Maria I", WAB 6 "Ave Maria II", and WAB 7 "Ave Maria III". They are in different styles and were composed in different periods of Bruckner's life: end of the Sankt-Florian period, beginning of the Linz period (end of Sechter's tuition) and the Vienna period (the so-called "mature" period). Would they not have to be also put chronologically in {{Anton Bruckner}}, as, e.g., Ave Maria I, II & III? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 21:42, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We have only one in the navbox because you did't answer the question where to place them ;) - A piece for voice and organ would not be called a motet in Baroque music. I'll put them there as motets now. We had I, II, III for Bach cantatas also, until we decided to take the catalogue numbers to differentiate. - I am not sure about the chronological order because someone not knowing would have problems to add one, but not with alphabet. We could add years, at least to those with several entries, making the sort more obvious. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. People will now understand, e.g., why the Symphony in D minor "0" is placed after Symphony No. 1. While doing so, I have moved Afferentur regi (2nd motet composed after Sechter's tuition) after Ave Maria (1861) (1st motet composed after Sechter's tuition). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 08:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I could indeed draft something on it. The motets could be placed in the 4 periods of Bruckner's life: youth (till 1845), St-Florian (1845-1856), Linz (after Sechter's tuition, 1861-1872) and Vienna (1873-1896), and so in the context of his "greater" works (Masses, Symphonies). What about the two Aequali WAB 114 and 149 (also placed by the MWV as "smaller religious works")? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 07:46, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination of Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Locus iste (Bruckner), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vienna Conservatory. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Before drafting the new page Motets (Bruckner) I have two question for you:
Do I include the two Aequali? They are stricto sensu not "motets", but they were composed as a kind of absoute for Bruckner's aunt Rosalia Mayrhofer
I am not intended to consider the 2nd version of the 5 Tantum ergo (WAB 41 & 42), Pange lingua WAB 31 and Iam lucis orto sidere (WAB 18) as separate item (i.e., new motets), but to include it in the short summary I am intended to put with each motet. OK so?
Thank you! Very helpful to have the position of the motets in the context of his development and the other compositions. Try to link only once, and have translations to titles without an article. Should we try to get Tantum Ergo moved to Tantum ergo? (And the others.) - Never heard of Passion Sunday and absoute, learning ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Description is back at BWV 243a. All the "Bärenreiter D-dur score" references have been removed though (wasn't even clear which of the many publications of the score by Bärenreiter the page numbers referred to). I left two publicly available D-dur sources listed in the BWV 243a article (Autograph, and Schering 1924). Plus the Novello 2000 and Dürr 1955 info, applying to both the D major and the Eb major versions. I suppose these should suffice for giving references for all what is different between the two versions in the description. See first two sentences of the BWV 243a#1 description of how this could work. There's an OR template up, until all this has been sorted out in the description.
Re. D major infobox. Why not? There's no discussion at Talk:Magnificat in D major, BWV 243, and I couldn't find anything in the edit history of the article showing anyone opposed an infobox. Anyhow, the description content is now transcluded in the BWV 243 article, so (not to spite you or whatever, just a practical solution) when the description is improved in 243a, the improved movement content automatically also appears in 243. Keep this in mind though when editing the 243a description of the communal 12 movements: if it doesn't apply to both versions either 243 or 243a needs to be mentioned explicitly, + appropriate references to sources listed in both articles. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:50, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Learning, thank you. (I am sorry that I had missed your response above, - it happens when I get more than one message.) I think to say that the information was "split" from D to E-flat (that's what I read) is misleading, but I stop caring about it, going to write CPE's, finally. Thank you for the question on the Magnificat in D! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking at the spring article I almost forgot. I have no time now nor the next days, but hope to get to it during the week. In the recent Magnificat, it helped to cite the score. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Jonas, we have a misunderstanding. You gave me seven days, I said (during in trip) that I had no time for the next few DAYS. I have no idea why you understood WEEKS. Please give me those seven days before failing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See above, vacation ;) - Before I can expand that I have to reference the St John Passion structure and the D major Magnificat, get Locus iste to GA standard (I nominated on our Kirchweih date before it was ready, then it was fully protected). I have a new article in mind for tomorrow but will not supply a red link, to not have the Locus iste struggle again ;) - If you want to fill red links, there are enough for a while in the Bach cantatas, singers but also hymn writers, hymns and places. You could also translate more for Katharinenkirche, Oppenheim, where we sang Locus iste on Saturday, and Bruckner's E minor Mass will be performed by the Kammerchor Stuttgart (not for me, more vacation, for most of October), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:57, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since the page Locus iste (Bruckner) was no more protected and there was no opposition to my proposal for a "selected discography", I have done the same for it too. Would I perhaps add the first recording to the discography of the Ave Maria (Bruckner) too?
I will now review the pages on the other motets, update their content and improve their selected discography accordingly.
Matthew Best with the Corydon Singers and Orchestra is one of the better performers of Bruckner's religious music. His CDs with performances of Bruckner's Requiem, Mass No. 2 (1882 version), and Psalms 114 and 112 are as yet possibly the nec plus ultra. His performances of Masses Nos. 1 and 3, Aequali, Libera me (II), Te Deum and Psalm 150 are also among the better ones, as well his CD devoted to Bruckner's motets.
I have done it. 'FYI: I have his 4 CDs with the larger works, but not that of 1982 earlier with motets. At that time I was not yet a "collector" and I had already the motets Jochum (1965) and Flämig (1985). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:34, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS. RE: Carmen Reppel, Didn't she play Friea in DAS RHEINGOLD on the Boulez video? If yes, there's a shot of Matti Salminen (Fasolt)'s rubber prop-hand grabbing her **ahem** intimate part as he demands to take her away as payment for building Walhall.
PPS. Since you like Bach's choral works, I VERY strongly recommend the recording of the CHRISTMAS ORATORIO, conducted by Karl Richter, with soloists Fritz Wunderlich, Gundula Janowitz, Christa Ludwig, and Franz Crass. The best Bach choral work, and the best Bach soloists, I have ever heard, and I've heard (and sung) a good deal of Bach. Goblinshark17 (talk) 12:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question: as you are not yet autopatrolled, every page you create needs a stamp that it is not harmful ;) - the bot doesn't know it's your user page. (I liked it red.) - PS: Do you have a link to the image of Freia, like this? - PPS: one of my conductors sang with Richter but not as early as 1965. We will sing the Missa 1733 (as he calls it) somewhat that style, next year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, sorry, I have no links to the Boulez RHEINGOLD images; I don't even have it on DVD but on an old VHS tape.
Image of Thomaskirche interior 1880
Hi Gerda—I was looking at this article, which displays the pic in question. The description of the file says, inter alia: "The organ loft is on the left." There's currently an organ there (newish), but the organ loft proper I'd always understood as being above the stand-point of the pic (see Wolff's book). Is the description misleading? Tony(talk) 14:35, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your opinion (of course). After reading some of the discussion at Jimbo's talk page, and before forming an opinion I had a closer look at Eric's talk page. I found his exchange with Cullen at the end of the "October 2014" section rather telling. Makes it logical to back up Jimbo on this one (for me at least). --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A "leader" who speaks of "toxic personalities", meaning people, any people ...
(bolding added) — I don't know who you're talking about. Jimbo spoke about
... toxic behavior ...
AFAIK. It is the difference between commenting on the edit and commenting on the person. Please don't misquote Jimbo on my talk page, alternatively, show me where he talked about toxic personalities. --Francis Schonken (talk) 06:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On the London convention. Search his talk archives a little deeper, perhaps look for my name. I can't help you, nor anybody else, today, - off to travel. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Die Darstellung des Kardinals im Bild entspricht der Beschreibung in einem Vertrag des Malers Pierre Spicre mit dem Stift der Kirche Notre-Dame in Beaune aus dem Jahr 1474, in dem dieser mit Entwürfen für Wandteppiche in der Kirche beauftragt wird: "es soll auch gemacht werden mein Herr der Kardinal betend, mit geschlossenen Händen, sein Kardinalshut neben ihm und sein Hündchen vor ihm, wie es ist auf dem Bild in der Kapelle St. Ligier in Beaune, das der genannte Meister gemacht hat." Offenbar diente Pierre Spicres Bild in der St. Ligier-Kapelle dem Meister von Moulins als Vorbild.[1]
The painting called presentation of the Cardinal is depicting in The image theme corresponds to the description in a contract of the painter that Pierre Spicre wrote i found the church Notre-Dame in Beaune in 1474, in which the painter is entrusted with the designs for tapestries in the Church: "it should be made my Lord the Cardinal praying with closed hands, his cardinal's hat beside him and his dog in front of him, as it is in the picture in the chapel of St. Ligier in Beaune, which has made the said Master. " Apparently Pierre Spicres was the model of the image in the St. Ligier Chapel Master of Moulins
^ Nach Albert Châtelet, Jean Prévost, Le Maître de Moulins
The presentation of the cardinal matches the description in a contract of the painter PS with the convent of the church ND in B from 1474 where he is commissioned to design for tapestries in for the church: " ... little dog ... which the named master has made." Apparently PS's picture in St.L served as a model for the Master of Moulins. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner's Ave Maria WAB 5 & WAB 7 are much less popular than his "famous" Ave Maria WAB 6.
Nearly every week there are, as for Locus iste, one or more new recordings of Ave Maria WAB 6 on YouTube. On the contrary there are only a total of 3 or 4 recordings of each of the two other settings on YouTube. If you want to listen to them
I'm curious why this revert was done to the Tropical Storm Kiko (2007) article. It is generally accepted that the year is included in a date, the first time a date appears in a section. That is done to assist our readers. If a reader excerpts a section of the article and no year appears in the date, it is difficult (impossible?) to determine when the event occurred. Some may argue that the year is in the article title, or in the intro/lead; however, not all readers look at the intro/lead, and often read just a portion of the article. Would you please reconsider the revert. Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, for most articles, but here the first mentioning of the year is given in the article title. The article was made a featured article like this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:15, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example of what I am referring to:
"On October 18, a tropical storm warning was issued along the Mexican coastline from Zihuatanejo, Guerrero to Manzanillo, Colima, and a tropical storm watch extended northward to La Fortuna, Mexico, as Kiko was forecast to make landfall in that region on October 21. Above-normal tides and dangerous waves were expected along the coast."
That is the introductory sentence in the Preparations and impact section. If that's all a person reads, how do they know what year it was? Adding the year to the date certainly assists the reader ... and isn't that our goal as an encyclopedia, to assist our readers and help them understand what they are reading? Also, are you inferring that featured articles should not be edited? Any article can always be improved upon. Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 13:30, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, you (and your talk page stalkers) may be interested in a thread I've started about Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests#Gough_Whitlam, where possibilities for marking the death (aged 98) of this former prime minister of Australia include re-running a TFA. I'm interested in getting lots of views so I'll be leaving this note on various pages (and apologies, TPS-ers, if your talk page is not one of them!) Thanks, BencherliteTalk08:47, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner's moetes - External review
Beste Gerda,
Hans Roelofs has reviewed Motets (Bruckner). He found a few typos and had a few comments. I have implemented it in a few minutes.
He has also reviewed Locus iste (Bruckner). He found a few typos and had a few comments. For two of them I need your input:
Bij “framing the second and third” heb ik even moeten nadenken wat je precies bedoelde; het klopt, maar voor iemand die het motet (nog) niet zo goed kent kan dat onduidelijk zijn.
“Oratorio Society of New York”: de zin is onlogisch. Je bedoelt dat dit in het programmaboekje bij hun uitvoering staat; de auteur van de tekst wordt in het programmaboekje niet aangegeven. Ik zou er iets van maken in de trant van: “De auteur van het programmaboekje van de Oratorio Society of New York wijst er op dat ... etc.”
I would think the first is clear, the second was not my idea - I don't believe in program books too much - but I kept it for politeness. Feel free to change. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the sentence says that. The text of three lines is just above, I assume the general reader can count to three without adding numbers or repeating the text. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any reason at all why you think this removal is not justified? I'm not going to keep attempting to remove it, but I do intend to file a complaint if you can't give me any reason why such a comment, which as anyone can see, is only being placed to mock Mr Wales and elicit some kind of reaction, which is the very definition of trolling, should be left intact. As you may or may not know, according to Giano himself, Mr Wales considers him to be a troll, so I don't think there is any reason to think Mr Wales would object to this removal in any way. Patrol forty (talk) 14:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Assume good faith. I didn't see mocking. I guess Mr. Wales is old enough to take care of his talk himself. Please note that I didn't revert your removal the first time, nor would I, again. I try to strictly follow 1RR. How about you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am assuming good faith. That's why I came here asking you to explain your action - if I didn't think there was the possibility of an innocent explanation, I wouldn't be asking. But I'm not seeing an explanation here at all. If you don't see the mocking, then I'd like to know, based on the facts at hand, whether you really believe Giano is an admirer of Mr Wales' insight and perception? Or whether you really believe he thinks Mr Wales is a modest person? Or whether Giano really appreciates and respects him? To an outside observer, the answer to those questions is obviously no - therefore the only purpose of the comments were to troll Mr Wales. Which is presumably why Mr Wales thinks Giano is a troll, and has done apparently for a very long time. I have no doubt Mr Wales is old enough to look after himself, but it obviously does not follow from that, that obvious trolling on his talk page should be tolerated, let alone restored when others try to remove it. I don't know why you not reverting more than once is relevant either - if you thought you could justify the first restoration, then why would you feel that repeating the action is not justified? Putting yourself under such a restriction would be appear to be an entirely artificial device. That said, the issue is moot now - thanks to you, the trolling has remained in place, and according to an administrator, the 'grown up' thing to do is ignore it. Which is obviously wrong, but the fact that they are an administrator and would presumably block me if I protested that obvious fallacy, is probably part of the governance failures Mr Wales is complaining about. Patrol forty (talk) 15:57, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What you wrote gave me that impression, what else? "... I'd like to know, based on the facts at hand, whether you really believe Giano is an admirer of Mr Wales' insight and perception? Or whether you really believe he thinks Mr Wales is a modest person? Or whether Giano really appreciates and respects him? To an outside observer, the answer to those questions is obviously no". Here you're even second-guessing Gerda's mind-reading abilities. EricCorbett17:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not following you at all. Please be specific. Who needs to read whose mind, for Gerda to be able to answer these few simple questions? Patrol forty (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:06, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful, Eric, be very careful ;) - (This is a close paraphrase from Anna Russell, "Weiche, Wotan, weiche", which means: Be careful ... She then bears him eight daughters.") - To the forceful patrol: it took me years to learn what "troll" means. I am with Giano and other victims, did you know? You seem not to know what AGF means, please try harder. - I am still on vacation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, as I had made clear already, I know exactly what assume good faith means (both the common sense definition and the Wikipedia WP:AGF definition). I don't know what "I am with Giano and other victims" means in this context. Are you saying you restored the trolling because you support the trolls? Was it your intent to troll Mr Wales too? Are you trying to mock him, as Giano did? While I was aware you are German before I posted here, I had presumed, given your use of advanced English elsewhere, that a language barrier wouldn't be an issue here. Was I wrong? Do you actually understand what Giano was actually doing with that post? Or have you merely read the words and taken them literally? I want to be clear here - do you or do you not understand that Giano was not praising Mr Wales? That is the whole point of a troll, to make a sarcastic point such as 'I respect you so much' when they clearly don't, simply to mock the other person. AGF is not an answer to these questions (because I don't yet have the good faith explanation from you for restoring the trolling). Patrol forty (talk) 19:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why is anyone wasting their time talking to this poor unfortunate. He even had to ping his hero in the title of this thread (which is more than he did me); perhaps he hopes he'll be thrown a discarded royal peanut. The sad thing is that by the time this thread is archived, he'll be blocked, gone and long forgotten. Giano(talk)21:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Quite. My only interest here is to find out why Gerda restored your trolling. Why anyone else felt the need to get involved here (including you) is lost on me. Gerda can refuse to answer if she wants, but she can't then ask people to assume good faith about what she meant by restoring your trolling - something she did without any explanation whatsoever, except "restore". Patrol forty (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I really find it quite extraordinary that whenever Mr Wales is payed a compliment, even his most loyal supporters can't believe its genuine. Now it looks to me like you are the on trolling here; it's clear that Gerda doesn't feel inclined to talk to you in any depth, so why not buzz of and write a page or create yet another sock or something? Giano(talk)19:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Giano, you worded that exquisitely, about the compliment. - You seem not to know - as I thought everybody did - that the self-ordained police was blocked, by now without talk page access. - I could archive this now, but like the visitors and the peanuts ;) - I friend died, American but lived our village, sad. What are trolls compared to loss of people? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have been busy all day and only just looged on. That is very sad about your friend, real life is always exactly that 'real' and far more important than all the silliness here. What a sad day for you. Giano(talk)19:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The last one - in case you missed that - died in September, - sad to change an article from living=yes to no, especially if you knew the person. He was a conductor at St. Lamberti, remember working on the church together? Now mentioned on my user page. I would eventually like to expand St. Valentinus, Kiedrich, look at the German, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Thanks, Gerda. I've been off Wikipedia for a few months after some excruciatingly frustrating experiences with a bunch of trollish Wikipedians, including an admin who says it's OK for another editor, perhaps his buddy, to curse at me and presumably at other editors. Your kind note hat acknowledges the tens of thousands of good edits that I, as a professional journalist, have made helps restore my faith in this project, even if just a little. With thanks and regards, Tenebrae (talk) 16:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Francy, don't be bad now. I know about it, but if I wan't that she could tell me how, that is not forbidden... AND - more important - might help translate that German article, she is great at that, you know! Hafspajen (talk) 22:04, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I wonder if you might have time to look over this nomination. All the sources save one are in German; we're not sure about neutrality and close paraphrasing. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are right! It was not composed for Maundy Thursday, but it is using the text of the gradual of Maundy Thursday. I will correct it. Errare humanum est!
Seen and ce, thank you! Let me understand why Gregorian Gradual. Isn't it gradual first, and Gregorian already the first musical setting? I may be wrong, would really like to know more about the propers of the mass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 28 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Michael Pospíšil, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that bass Michael Pospíšil and his ensemble Ritornello recorded music from the hymnal Capella Regia Musicalis, "one of the jewels of Czech musical history"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Pospíšil. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hi Gerda. I happened across the Güstrower Dom article on German WP and thought, this might be a good one for Gerda to render in English. Interesting side-story re Ernst Barlach's Der Schwebende, mentioned here. Just a suggestion, in case you're looking for a topic. Sca (talk) 13:51, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good suggestion. Instead of writing on the topics I have in mind I get distracted by an article by me getting redirected 4 times, then made a draft, after 1 1/2 years in Main space ;) - another kafkaesque story, laugh or weep, I better laugh. On November 16, we'll sing a concert including Flow my tears (sung by soloist). - Remind me of Güstrow next year ;)
BWV 233-236, and a warning
Re. [71] — I'm getting a mixed signal here: at Talk:Bach's church music in Latin#BWV 233-236 you ask to postpone the discussion to later (you asked that yesterday), but you seem to have plenty of time for a series of edits you have no time to discuss now. Please let's look at these four masses (BWV 233, 234, 235, 236) together, not separately, and discuss at Talk:Bach's church music in Latin#BWV 233-236 before going one way for one of these and another for the others.
For good order: [72] was a breach of the 3.2 remedy of the infoboxes ArbCom case. Just tought to make the warning official, in case it might end up at WP:AE the next time something like this happens. --Francis Schonken (talk) 06:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am with you to keep the four short masses together in your article. If others think differently, please address them, not me. - I didn't say I had no time. I said I had other priorities which I changed. - Arbitration and infoboxes - a waste of time. - Locus iste - I listen to three minutes of an expression of holiness in the most simple and beautiful way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Locus iste (Bruckner)
On 29 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Locus iste (Bruckner), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in the motet Locus iste, composed for the dedication of the votive chapel of Linz Cathedral, Anton Bruckner requests a pause "by carefully measuring out five beats"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I have begun to update the pages on Bruckner's motets, which have been drafted by Nikki. In Afferentur regi I have completed the history, added the text and described the score more in detail. I will do the same for the other drafted pages. In this context van Zwol is an excellent reference for the history of all 40 motets, and Auer for the description of the score of 18 of them.
The Grail motif of Parsifal is ending with a Dresdner Amen. I had already cited the two occurrences of the Dresdner Amen in the motet, but not that it was a consequence of the attendance to Wagner's Parsifal. Bruckner used the Dresdner Amen also in two subsequent motets (Virga Jesse and Vexilla regis) and the adagio of the ninth symphony.
I confess that I didn't know that it is not "or" but connected. Perhaps clarify in the article. I found the Bruckner site when I looked for refs for the dates and thought that it supports some facts nicely. I bet that the book is more profound but the other more accessible to online readers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
van Zwol writes on p. 707: "Opvallend is de bij Bruckner vaker aan te treffen en hier tweemaal voorkomende 'theologische bekrachtiging', in de maten 23-24 (...) en 37-38 (...), afkomstig uit het Dresdner Amen en ook bekend van Wagners 'Grals-Sextet' in diens Parsifal." van Zwol's book is indeed more profound, but less accessible (only for people, who have it and can read Dutch). I will tomorrow put some nuance to the sentence, i.e., as van Zwol writes that both, Bruckner's Christus factus est and Parsifal's Grail-motif, are using the same Dresdner Amen, without mention of a (not proven) cause and effect relationship between these two events. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 22:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The translation of the German text is from my own...
PS: I am intended, when I will find time for it, to complete the other pages drafted by Nikki, and to write pages on all remaining Bruckner's motets, and perhaps later on Bruckner's organ and piano works. As I previously wrote, the history of all those Bruckner's works is described by van Zwol and I have at least one recording of all these works too. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 22:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In jener letzten der Nächte,
Da ich am Ölberg gebetet,
War ich von Blutschweiß geröthet,
Goß ihn in Strömen für dich:
Weh! Und wer weiß, ob wohl je
Du auch nur denkest an mich!
In that last of nights,
When I prayed at the Mount of Olives,
I was reddened from blood sweat,
Poured it streaming for you.
Woe! And who knows if ever
you even think of me!
Warning against what I see as battleground behaviour
Just a friendly reminder about Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes#Gerda Arendt admonished: "Gerda Arendt is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground..." in connection with what happens at Talk:Mass for the Dresden court (Bach)#Name, where I identified why the discussion is so futile, and imho doesn't pass the WP:DUCK test on battleground behaviour. Please desist if you haven't really anything to say regarding the current article title, but only want to continue discussing other possible article titles that have no decisive advantages. If you can't agree on the matter with those currently commenting there, set up a WP:RM as I already recommended. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say (and said) against the title that Mass suggest (to me, it may be my language limit) a complete mass, while Bach's Missa contains Kyrie and Gloria. I made my last entry there. I look at this, from [74]:
I. Missa (Kyrie & Gloria)
II. Symbolum Nicenum (Credo)
III. Sanctus
IV. Osanna, Benedictus, Agnus Dei et Dona nobis pacem
Interesting what you consider a battle. I thought we were looking for the best possible title. Forgive me please that I still tried to improve after you found one. You moved without ado, made the former a confusing dab page instead of a redirect, and now come here. I thought we were looking for the best possible title. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jesu, meine Freude you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 16:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Gerda. I just now saw the message you left me. I've been too busy for Wikipedia for a while. It's an extremely busy, high-stress time for me at work right now; the award along with your kind words was such a wonderful surprise. It means more to me than you know! Thanks again. Best, Joefromrandb (talk) 22:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to offer my thanks as well for the message that I was left. I don't have as much time for editing as I used to, but an occasional bit of praise from a talented fellow editor makes me feel like the time I do spend here is worth it. Thanks again. Giants2008 (Talk) 16:13, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I said it was good to be back, and I appreciated the kind words from you and other editors. But now the same editor who drove me away before with his repeated "fuck offs" and the admin who says it's OK to tell other editors to fuck off are it again. I was minding my own business, not even thinking about that foulmouthed person, and just trying to put it behind me. But within days of my return he's on my talk page, poking me a stick. And the admin is saying, literally, that if I don't like being told "fuck off" that all my past good work means nothing and that I should leave Wikipedia.
I don't know what my future is here. I've started an ANI here, and hopefully something will come of that. I just wanted to let some of the good and responsible editors here know, and that if they're interested in following what's going on, that's the link. I am disheartened as hell. --Tenebrae (talk) 10:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to see you disheartened. "Fuck" is only a word. I made a hook about encouragement, and one for singing in defiance. As you can see above, I am famous for battleground behaviour. If it helps a victim or the ideas of a composer about naming his work, I am ready to fight. But right now I have VERY limited time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello: His last name is Vaughan Williams, a common British double-name construction. Vaughan is not his middle name. Please revert the edits you recently made that change his name to Williams. Thank you! --Wspencer11(talk to me...)20:32, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for contacting me on this issue, and for informing me of the impact of article moves on DYK stats; I hadn't been aware of this before. I appreciate you explaining your reversions and linking the recent discussion of Schubert articles. I am not convinced that the Schubert example is sufficiently analogous to the Bruckner articles to justify including the redundant disambiguators in the titles of the latter, but I am very busy outside of Wikipedia right now and I don't have time to pursue this issue further at the moment. Perhaps we can renew the discussion another time. It is good to see that you continue to produce high-quality music-related articles on Wikipedia.
Thanks for coming over, I might say Ave Neelix! The main author followed your example for the less known works of the same title, see above. (Stats 662 + 916.) Just the timing was not perfect ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have reviewed and competed the already created pages on Bruckner's motets.
The popular Os justi (Bruckner) is indeed the next page I am intended to create. "Pange lingua, WAB 33", "Libera me, WAB 22" and "Inveni David, WAB 19" are the next candidates.
PS: Hans Roelofs has just provided me with three compilation CDs with his nec plus ultra of the Kleine Kirchenmusikwerke (MWV, B 21), which incudes rare life performances of works for which no commercially recordings are (not yet) available.
What is a Versus-Chorale (or Versus-Choral)? Looks strange in English with two caps and hyphen. "added verse"? "extra verse"? - Where does "Its der ganze Text?" come from. In "my" German it would be "Ist das der ganze Text?", possibly "Ist's", while "Its" is no German word I know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The meaning of "Versus-Chorale" is indeed "extra verse" (in Gregorian style). I will adapt it. "Its der ganze Text?" (sic) is what Traumihler replied (Austrian dialect). I will adapt it too. I have in the meantime added an infobox. I will now add some additional info to section "Music". --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 21:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 9 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Christus factus est, WAB 11, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Bruckner's third setting of the gradual Christus factus est, composed 40 years after the first, reaches a dramatic climax and ends pianissimo? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Re. "the case is closed" - indeed. People looking for old evidence may find the link regarding the page move which I posted there, where also other follow-up notices are posted. So unless a clerck or anyone else uninvolved in the content of the matter replies I don't see what else I should do for the time being. Note, I have posted similar follow-up notes on arbcom case talk pages before (even cases in which I was involved [77]), nobody ever said I shouldn't do that. When it's helpful, it's helpful, without assuming any clerck-like authority. It's not like I'm (re)opening whatever discussion, just a convenience note and/or a question about a practical matter. --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Learning. - I have little experience with arbcom cases, - I thought a case called "Infoboxes" was about infoboxes, and learned that I was wrong. I plan that case to be my only one, - at least we won more understanding for ad absurdum ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I took an initiative to put remedy six of that case in motion. Again, you all directly touched by the ArbCom case should have done that a long time ago. There's no "bad" in posting on the case talk page a link to where this initiative has started, nor in adding a question there about a side-effect I hadn't foreseen (but which I personally think non-essential).
As to the content of the matter of your latest remarks and suggestions on my talk page: the previous content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox (including its edit history) was user-owned (in case: by Gerda Arendt). For that reason they needed to be WP:USERFYed. They blocked the development of a remedy six initiative, as long as they were in project namespace. FYI, the approach developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infoboxprior to the infoboxes arbcom case, appears to have been widely discussed in that case. Arbitrators disapproved of that prior approach, and suggested a completely different one in remedy six. Sorry for setting that recommended approach in motion, but that is what happened. Be thankful and collaborate, instead of this attitude of obstruction to what you all involved in the case should have been doing in the first place.
The first appears completely unrelated. At least I fail to see the link with the current discussion;
The second appears unrelated to me to, except for a defense of direct questions in Gerda's reply to Voceditenore last entry to that talk page section ("...I would iron the shirt if the request addressed me personally: "Can you please iron this shirt?""). So I hope we can have done with the surprise links, as I said above, "presenting indirect and somewhat unintelligble arguments". It's like instead of someone asking directly "Can you please iron this shirt?" (as Gerda apparently prefers), or asking it in the most indirect way Voceditenore could find ("I think this shirt would look better if it were ironed"), asking it still more indirectly: "I give you time to reflect on a shirt that you can find in a closet upstairs". Shirts getting ironed as a result of such request: unlikely. --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to follow any link, the message is clear without: Listen to Voceditenore, the precious voice of reason who gave me good advice. The links are added like references, the first for "precious" and "voice of reason", the second to illustrate sound advice. Here's a link you will hopefully understand: Da pacem Domine (in case you missed requested a break and plea for peace on top). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter in which order you made edits you better revert. - WP:QAI is pro-infobox, it's one of its goals, with a link to a PROJECT PAGE which happens to have been maintained mainly by me, but supported by the other members. Please restore WP:QAI/Infobox. What we have now has the right content, not a redirect to user space as you made it, but the wrong (cut and paste) article history. - To conduct any discussion about infoboxes on WP:QAI means it would be not on a neutral site. - My guess is that the community and the arbs (soon to be changed) don't want to discuss what you propose, and that users formerly believed to be on different sides of the matter collaborate amicably, see Peace. - One of the Bish's (forgot which Bish and when) once asked me to bite more. Don't tempt me ;) - Da pacem Domine, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:35, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner's Aequali I & II
Dear Gerda,
Bruckner'swo Aequali for 3 trombones are popular works. There are about 50 recordings of them.
In the MWV they are put in Band 21 Kleine Kirchenmusikwerke. Therefore I have put them in Motets (Bruckner) as related works.
Let me think, - the first and last Ave Maria are no true motet (as I understand the word), but here nothing is sung. - Rename Motets "Short sacred works"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In the List of compositions by Anton Bruckner we have 70 "religious works": 18 "large choral works" (masses, etc.), 50 "smaller choral works", and the "2 aequali".
On the en-Wikipedia and the fr-wikipedia I am using {{IMSLP2|id=Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich)|cname=Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76}}. Unfortunately this template does not work on Commons.
On the contrary, [[Scores:Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich)|♫]], used in List of compositions by Anton Bruckner, 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 Commons. Perhaps you could use something like this.
Best regards,
I don't think I was clear enough. The IMSLP link is in the article, in a template, you can copy from there. - What I would like is to show the image (!) of the title page as an image in the article, to save readers the long wait for IMSLP to open and the even longer wait for that particular image, rather have a glance first sight. So: the image alone needed to be copied to the commons. Is it possible, if yes, how? (The composer image, now lead, would then go below where the viols are mentioned.) - Other question: Should I move Klag-Lied to Mit Fried und Freud, because it's the title of a publisher and IMSLP? - I used Klag-Lied because of the corresponding article in French, brevity and less German, however we have Mit Fried und Freud ich fahr dahin, BWV 125 and will have the hymn. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand it well, you want to put the front page[80] in the Infobox. I do not see how you can do it without copying it in Commons. The picture is apparently in the public domain. You could thus theoretically copy it and put it in Commons, mentioning only where it is coming from.
Thank you for the image help. - I moved to the title on IMSLP and publisher, the Incipit. The title on the first publication - the image - is way too long ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is German, even exists[81], will not have an article, but let's assume it was an article title: how would it be subjected to house style? I would like to learn what this mysterious house style does to names (which I believe should not be changed at all, and we are polite enough not to change French titles, German titles, ... - why English?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Next motet created
Dear Gerda,
I have just created the page Pange lingua, WAB 31, Bruckner's very first composition, which he reviewed at the end of his life.
Hello, and thank you very much for your comment on my talk page. I am just an ordinary editor, though, who has hardly any time to do much now, because I am in China with little access to sources that I could use well (most of them are still in my house in the UK, because I can't spend the time, expense, or customs red-tape to bring them here). I also am saddened by what wikipedia is becoming with a veering away from content into adminsitrtaive and procedural obsessions. So, once again, thank you. DDStretch (talk)17:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 15 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Christus factus est, WAB 10, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Bruckner scored his second setting of Christus factus est for eight vocal parts, trombones, and strings, but added, "Besser ohne Violinen" (Better without violins)? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
The next page to be created is over "Two Asperges me, WAB 3". How will I proceed? Putting the two on a single page with two Infoboxes or on two separate pages? A same problem will appear for the "Four Tantum ergo, WAB 41". Please advise. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:41, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
PS: The "Four Tantum ergo" can be well put in a single Infobox, because their text content is the same. The "Two Asperges me" not, because they are dedicated for different celebrations and their text content is different. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You need to decide if the two pieces have much in common, then one, or not, then individual. Look at Mit Fried und Freud for an example of two in one, because they were published as one, BuxWV 76m - otherwise they are as different as can be. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:01, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What would you want to see added to the Pange lingua WAB 31? I have uploaded to Commons the manuscript of the second version I have found in Auer's book, so that I could illustrate the Infobox. I perhaps could describe the score more in detail. In French we say "La plus belle fille ne peut donner que ce qu'elle a." This work is apparently largely ignored. There is a single commercial recording of its second version, and I [82] and Hans,[83] successively, found this year the very first two live performances of its first version. The second Pange lingua (WAB 33) of 1868 (Linz period) is better known. I will later create a page on it. The second version of the Vier Tantum ergo WAB 41 and the Tantum ergo WAB 42 is a little better known, but their first version (St. Florian period), as well as the 3 other Tantum ergo (WAB 32, 43 and 44) are also largely ignored. This is te same for the majority of the other works of the St Florian period. This is a little bit the problem with all Bruckner's "youth" works (i.e., before 1861), except for the Requiem, the Aequali and the second Libera me (WAB 22)... --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 18:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what YOU know and could add ;) - perhaps have the second and compare in one hook, if the early one is not good for enough content? Did you see how I did four Magnificat in one? I could imagine Tantum ergo (Bruckner), with redirects for the individual ones. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
About 20 motets are plus or minus "well-known". The other half is less known, even ignored, except locally in Austria and Bavaria. T. Kerbl recorded most of them, but insular (J. Brown, D. Ferguson and R. Jones) and sometimes other conductors too.
There are still a few page to be created for early "forgotten" works, for which very few literature is available (Libera me WAB 21, Dir, Herr, dir will ich mir ergeben, O du liebes Jesu Kind and Herz-Jesu-Lied). If I want to have a complete set of the motets, I have also to create them!
For the "Vier Tantum ergo" WAB 41 and Tantum ergo WAB 42, there is more literature (and recordings) available - at least for their second version (1888), which was published together as "Fünf Tantum ergo". Il will, as in the MWV, put the "Vier Tantum ergo" together on a single page. For one of the other three Tantum ergo (WAB 32), there is also more data available, because it was published as Pange lingua - the reason why Grasberger put it as "WAB 32" together with the two "true" Pange lingua. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:45, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Next motet (to be) created
Dear Gerda,
I have created the page on the next motetDir, Herr, dir will ich mich ergeben, the last motet of the Kronstorf period (or one of the first motets of the St. Florian period?).
Tantum ergo, WAB 43 and Four Tantum ergo, WAB 41 created. WAB 41 was not a very easy job because of the 2 versions. Max Auer, IMSLP and ChoralWiki refer only to the 2nd version. I have only used the keys and avoided to use the number WAB 41.1, WAB 41.2, etc. because, due the first edition, the WAB ordering is not in accordance with the ordering in the original manuscripts. Hopefully it is OK so. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 16:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When you ask for a translation of 17th-century German, I try to turn it into 17th-century English, within reason. One has to avoid going all the way, so I did not say "royall Citie", but for what it's worth Olave is the traditional English spelling of Olaf/Olai and is usually pronounced "Olive". Cf. St Olave's Church, York, and Southwark St Olave... Moonraker (talk) 03:23, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, there. I'm in a bit of a spot with an FAC. It's for the video game character Lightning. The nomination has been up since October 6 and has not had any editing activity since the 31st of the same month: it has three supports and a passed image review, but it still lacks a source review. According to one of the editors who have commented on the WikiProject talk page on the subject, it is "already in great shape, so the final reviewer won't have much work to do". The people at the video games WikiProject advised that it find someone not as deeply linked with video game-related articles as the other users who commented were. I remember you left me a very nice "Precious" message on my talk page, and I didn't remember you being part of any of the projects I had been involved in. So, could you please help the FAC get the last bit of help it needs by doing the source review? You are under no obligation to do anything of the kind if you don't want to. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking, - I have limited time, see top of the page (postponed several things until today), and practically no knowledge of the topic (which may be a advantage ;) ). Better don't rely on me having time for it soon. Nikkimaria is good in source review, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just to say that I'm away all day tomorrow so won't get around to it until Wednesday. I do know him personally from when I was working so I would have recused myself, but I guess you don't want that as an answer! Dougweller (talk) 21:50, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to come over. - The question is not what I want but how you want to present yourself and your style of argumentation to the voters ;) - It's a simple question about the letter and spirit of a restriction, - rather independent of who was found to not have violated it, - we know that much, looking at the collapsed archived discussion. - There is also the possibility that people grow, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fork
WP:REDUNDANTFORK while the updates had been copied. When content applicable to both 243 and 243a is expanded in one of the pages, and not in the other, then WP:Content fork still applies, and there is as much a recommendation to merge. In other words, your recent edits to the 243a page only give more strength to the "merge" argument. --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:40, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Could you convince anybody but yourself? - I suggest we have one article about the details, which is linked to from both sides, is updated one spot, and leave the rest separate for clarity. The idea of scoring and keys in a combined table frightens me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have commented in two places, the D major article and Francis' talk page, that a WP:SPLIT is not a fork - nor I will add here - is it a redundant fork, particularly where there is little redundancy. Montanabw(talk)21:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Warning
I don't take lightly to this halfbaked accusation that I wouldn't have presented my reasons yet: [84] — Please beware of battleground attitudes, only confirming the reputation ArbCom opined you used to have. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Where are your reasons on that talkpage? (I expect them in a clear list, best numbered, so that we can respond to specific points.) - If I ask you to present something I don't find, and you understand that as an accusation (I try to ignore "halfbaked"), we have a problem in the communication. - Are you aware that the arbitrators used the term "battleground" once, while all other occurrences regarding me are by you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Thanks for the DYK review. I responded to your concerns there. Please let me know if there is anything else. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nos. 14, 16, 22-24, 31, 32, (35) and 36 have still to be created. The next pages will thus be the popular "Zwei Aequale" (No. 14) and the forgotten "Zwei Totenlieder" (No. 16).
Out of the to-be-created pages, Nos. 14 and 16 are of the Sankt Florian period, Nos. 22-24 of the Linz period, and Nos. 31, 32 and 36 of the Vienna period. No. 35 is a 2nd version of No. 24. Nos. 14 (Zwei Aequale), 22 (Pange lingua, WAB 33) and 23 (Inveni David, WAB 19) are quite popular works, the others are among the "forgotten" works.
di Lasso seems to make fun of it ;) - How is this, same as Prece, but German translation? - Otherwise just give Brucker's (Riepl's) text, should by no copyright violation. Point out the difference. (As Da pacem Domine: same beginning, two texts.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:18, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the text used by Bruckner is also different from that of the Breviarium Romanum.
Gerda, can you offer me a translation? Like, in "In der römisch-katholischen Kirche ist die Spendung der Taufe...", or "... heidnische Kinder um der Taufspendung willen “kidnappten.”? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Michael! - In the Catholic Church "werden Sakramente gespendet", sacraments are ??? - What we insert depends on if we need only the meaning, or some idiomaic translation, - I always call Moonraker for the latter. - Do we need a technical term in church language? - "Spenden" in today's German is to give. donate, etc., "spenden" will only be used for something thought to be beneficial, from blessing to money. My 2ct. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, although Spendung does have a plainer meaning, it is the word properly used in the Church of Rome for the "administering" of the sacraments, of which baptism is one, and I believe the others are confirmation, holy orders, matrimony, penance, and extreme unction. The notion of heidnische Kinder is quite common now, although if a child is too young to understand religious concepts then it is also too young to be a heathen. When I was at school, kidnappen would not have been looked on as a German verb. Change and decay in all around I see! Moonraker (talk) 12:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, most helpful. The seventh sacrament (had to be a holy number) is communion. - There was a time when children were baptized as soon as possible, because it was believed to be a prerequisite for them to enter Heaven. - Trying to fight decay right here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all. This is from an article by Hubertus Lutterbach on Boniface, so yes, baptism as soon as possible or the child will end up in Limbo should it die. Michael, I'm going to go with "administering" or some variant thereof; this wouldn't be so hard if Lutterbach weren't writing in this horrible jargon. There's German writing and there's German writing, but this is really German writing. I'm reading an article by Arnold Angenendt, and by comparison his prose is crisp and tasty like a well-made BLT. Drmies (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that you did that--going through Sorrow was the quickest way to the German wiki. Well done--and thanks, on behalf of my countrymen. Is it in the Dutch wiki already? Did we already take care of that? Drmies (talk) 02:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The Allgemeiner Cäcilien-Verband für Deutschland was indeed already founded in 1868. FYI: I have two recordings of this "uncommon" motet: Jones (sung as in an abbey) and Rademann (somewhat more animated).
another reason
I found this edit: [86] — Question: for what reason did you change
* Aria ''Quia fecit mihi magna'' (''[[Magnificat (Bach)|Magnificat]] BWV 243'')
to
* Aria ''Quia fecit mihi magna'' ([[Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a]])
* Aria ''Quia fecit mihi magna'' (''[[Magnificat (Bach)|Magnificat]] BWV 243'')
)
I found similar other cases, where the BWV 243a article was linked by you, for no apparent reason, while the article said/should say something about Bach's composition, not about a particular version of it.
Unless that can be cleaned up (I mean all instances of that), BWV 243a should redirect to the general article about the composition, not to your flavour of it. --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I remember I offered somewhere to help out with translation of something from French, but I have completely forgotten what it was. If you point me in the right direction I'll roll into action. Tim riley talk16:35, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the pre-merger situation as best I am able. There may be talk pages left in the wrong place and so forth. I expect a new merger discussion to be started and to be closed by an uninvolved person, preferably another admin. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, can you offer me a translation? Like, in "In der römisch-katholischen Kirche ist die Spendung der Taufe...", or "... heidnische Kinder um der Taufspendung willen “kidnappten.”? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Michael! - In the Catholic Church "werden Sakramente gespendet", sacraments are ??? - What we insert depends on if we need only the meaning, or some idiomaic translation, - I always call Moonraker for the latter. - Do we need a technical term in church language? - "Spenden" in today's German is to give. donate, etc., "spenden" will only be used for something thought to be beneficial, from blessing to money. My 2ct. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, although Spendung does have a plainer meaning, it is the word properly used in the Church of Rome for the "administering" of the sacraments, of which baptism is one, and I believe the others are confirmation, holy orders, matrimony, penance, and extreme unction. The notion of heidnische Kinder is quite common now, although if a child is too young to understand religious concepts then it is also too young to be a heathen. When I was at school, kidnappen would not have been looked on as a German verb. Change and decay in all around I see! Moonraker (talk) 12:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, most helpful. The seventh sacrament (had to be a holy number) is communion. - There was a time when children were baptized as soon as possible, because it was believed to be a prerequisite for them to enter Heaven. - Trying to fight decay right here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all. This is from an article by Hubertus Lutterbach on Boniface, so yes, baptism as soon as possible or the child will end up in Limbo should it die. Michael, I'm going to go with "administering" or some variant thereof; this wouldn't be so hard if Lutterbach weren't writing in this horrible jargon. There's German writing and there's German writing, but this is really German writing. I'm reading an article by Arnold Angenendt, and by comparison his prose is crisp and tasty like a well-made BLT. Drmies (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that you did that--going through Sorrow was the quickest way to the German wiki. Well done--and thanks, on behalf of my countrymen. Is it in the Dutch wiki already? Did we already take care of that? Drmies (talk) 02:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
.... in diebus nostris. Quia non est alius. Qui pugnet pro nobis. Nisi tu Deus noster. Fiat pax in virtute tua. (I know - but this is not that kind of drinking). Hafspajen (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I WILL stay. Das könnte denen so passen. On the German Main page: Klag-Lied (pictured), written (de) 14 Nov on the birthday of my friend the publisher, approved quickly for today's Totensonntag. Here it's still waiting to appear. The day the arbitrators break up long-standing friendly collaborations of editors (and for what?) would be a good day. I like Kafka. So far I hope. Did you know that one of the arb candidates dared to use the term "common sense" in matters related to "arbitration"? (I asked them all the same question.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for great work on the structure and sources of Bach's Mass in B minor!
I don't know the best way or place to write to you to thank you. (There is a heart icon that links to a way to send appreciation, but I don't understand it.) So, this is where I am thanking you for all the work on the sources of the movements of the mass, etc. After making a few edits today, I saw the history and see all you have done to create (I think) and improve this page. Thanks!! A Bach-lover...David Couch (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Warning against battleground behaviour under infoboxes case remedies at Talk:Magnificat (Bach)
Your WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour (e.g. commenting on editors instead of on edits with incorrect allegations; raising issues and then not including them in the "to be discussed" list you proposed,...) hasn't gone unnoticed at Talk:Magnificat (Bach). Please note that the discussion is de facto also about the infobox that would go lost when Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a would become a redirect (which you oppose), so that the discussion could be seen as falling under the remedies of the infoboxes arbcom case, which made battleground behaviour subject to sanctions. I hope I don't have to warn you again. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:10, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Francis. This is harassment Opposing your redirect is not an infobox situation. Its about a redirect. End of story. Further, hammering another editor this way is tendentious and may be construed as an intimidation tactic. Please stop/(Littleolive oil (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC))[reply]
English translation
Dear Gerda,
If you can find some time for it, could you please review my translation of the German text of Vor Arneths Grab, WAB 53. I had particularly some difficulty with that of the fourth strophe.
Thanks for improving my poor translation. I had obviously misunderstood the original content of the fourth strophe!
Voor Arneth Grab, which Grasberger put it in the religious songs, but the Gesamtausgabe put it in the Weltliche Chöre, is a beautiful, consoling song. I have the two recordings of it. I find it a pity that it is largely ignored.
The same occurred for the beautiful, ignored Trauungschor, WAB 49 of 1865, which is scored for mens' voice choir and organ. Grasberger put it too in the religious songs, but the Gesamtausgabe put it in the Weltliche Chöre. I have also the single recording of it. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Don't say "poor" about your work, ever ;) - We all try, mine could also be improved, - I don't know how to render the last word, "hin", for example. It implies "to be with God, wherever he is", no way to say that in one word in English. - Some mean by religious or sacred strictly: for the church service. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On his CD, Kerbl recorded Vor Arneths Grab and only the first two strophes (same setting a cappella) of Am Grab. I find it a pity that he was lazy to study the different setting of the third strophe, so that we have only the YouTube performance of this song, well with a different text. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 16:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WAB 33
Dear Gerda,
Musica sacra is the journal of the Cecilian society edited by Franz Xaver Witt. Auer writes on p. 56 "Das ganze Stück ist voll mystischer Stimmung und ich möchte es trotz seiner großen Einfachheit zu den besten von Bruckners kirchlichen Chorwerken zählen."
I would include the full sentence in English with no quotation marks, German in brackets with quotation marks. For an example the opposite way look at de:Mit Fried und Freud (Buxtehude) with some quotes in English which I translated (freely) to German, providing the original in English. It was discussed on my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you add that - and I found a new online source, please check it out for more detail - it will be ready for DYK. Do you want to nominate yourself?
As I wrote above, I believe that the beautiful, ignored Trauungschor, WAB 49, is a "true" religious song. The single performance of the song (by the Liedertafel Frohsinn) occurred in the Linzer Stadtpfarrkirche during the celebration of the wedding of Bruckner's friend Karl Kerschbaum with Maria Schimatschek on 5 February 1865 - the reason why Grasberger put it in the religious songs. On the contrary the Gesamtausgabe put it in the Weltliche Chöre. I will later create a page on it too.
The other wedding song Zur Vermählungsfeier, WAB 54 (composed in 1878 and scored for mens choir a cappella), which Grasberger also put it in the religious songs, was not performed in a church, because the groom was protestant. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I try to do so! On my user page Commons you can see the icon "This user stays mellow" and on that on the French Wikipeda I have signed la "Charte du contributeur en science".
The following pages to create would perhaps be the five Namenstags-Kantaten.[1] An overview page on the works for piano[2] and perhaps also a short overview page on the organ works[2] could be created.
I do not think that other pages on Lieder and Weltiche Chöre[3] are suitable, because they are all in German on not for an English-speaking public. They should also all be translated...
Stay mellow ;) - I have work (more than) enough at the moment, want to reach a certain level of completeness for the Bach cantatas for the end of the church year, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For the Arneth Cantate, WAB 61 and Mayer Cantate, WAB 60 I have found the original text and an English translation in Kinder's book The wind and wind-chorus music of Anton Bruckner. For Entsagen, WAB 14 and het Festgesang, WAB 15, I have only the German text. For the first cantata, WAB 93 I have no text at all.
Jürgen Jürgens was intended to recorded the five early cantatas with the Monteverdi Choir, but unfortunately it did not occur. For the last two of the early cantatas (WAB 60 and WAB 15) there is a single recording by Thomas Kerbl. For the first three cantatas WAB 93, 14 and 61 there is no recording at all currently available. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:59, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Did you know that this cantata, which Bruckner composed one year after the Missa solemnis, is the one but last large work he composed during his stay in Sankt Florian. Five months later, three weeks before his move to Linz he composed the next cantata Festgesang, WAB 15 (for mixed choir, soloists and piano), as Farewell to St. Florian. I will add it to the History of the page. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:41, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am now drafting the first of these cantatas ("Arneth Cantata", WAB 61). No recording available. German text and translation found in Kinder's book. I will upload it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Hans has provided me with some additional data about the two earlier cantatas, but the harvest is still very meagre...
Nice! How about numbering the movements? Did you see my latest, a start? Will sing it tomorrow, incredible Et incarnatus, in free tempo and interesting harmonies. Kyrie/Christe: the invocation is always p, "eleison" always f (two words, the second eleison different from the first), The second (!) Kyrie after Christe is a recap of the very first, otherwise they are all different! 12 of them! Where the 13th would be you have a unison downward broken "verminderter Septakkord", and another surprise: two p eleison in the end. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The second link is helpful, thanks to you, but places it under Short masses. What do you think of (eventually) moving Missa brevis to Missa (music) (now a redirect), which I think would help in all these cases where "brevis" is not typically used. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:59, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
... for your review of the article and hook. I hadn't known about that rule at dewiki; it seems understandable though I don't think we'd go for it here. Daniel Case (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here, it was Andy who told me that he aims at only one link: to the article for which you want attention. It worked well for my favourite which he wrote when he was close to being banned, look for peace and reconciliation. - I have fond memories of the Pocantico area, thank you for the reminder! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good one that, but there's really nothing else you could really link to, nor need to link in that hook. I suppose that's a special kind of perfection ... Daniel Case (talk) 05:16, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, how best to translate ambiguous nonsense? In prose: Take love away from me and pass it to the other (so faithful) woman who already gave him the ring. Equals renunciation. As if love was some thing that Mary could pass from one woman to the next ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I originally asked you to review it, because I was not sure that I did understand the meaning of this strophe. I am not German native...) It is indeed ambiguous. "Liebe" and "Maria" are both feminine... Let it as it is. Have a fine Sunday! --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:27, 30 November 2014 (UTC)#[reply]
No problem, it's just lousy German. Liebe, the speaker, the other woman, Mary, - all feminine. "Und der so treu sie gib": "der" refers to the other woman, because the speaker is out (will not say that about herself), you don't give to love, and Mary is addressed. "so treu" could also be interpreted as an adverb to the giving, which would result in "And give it so faithfully to her". - We sang the Haydn Missa, the conductor was delighted! (the group pictured in my own infobox, just singing from the organ loft, - pictures were taken today again.) The Bach Missa was announced, concert 1 February 2015. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will refer to it. I will tomorrow draft the page on the very first cantata (WAB 93) Musikalischer Versuch nach der Kammer-Styl (2 versions), better known as Vergißmeinnicht (3rd version) - the single large work, which Bruckner composed during his stay in Kronstorf. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:30, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS: And, thereafter, a page on Laßt Jubeltöne laut erklingen, WAB 76, a (semi-)cantata composed in c. 1854 for the joyous entrance of Sissi in Linz; and perhaps... a page on the "Military march", WAB 116, and overview pages on the "Piano works", the "Organ works" and the "Weltliche Chorwerke". What about the last piece of chamber music (Abenklänge, WAB 110)? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You might check if any of the last works could make it to DYK, needs 1.500 characters of prose and citations throughout. WAB 14: 1259 char, 15: 883, 49: 1320, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have a scan of the book Amaranth of Oskar v. Redwitz, Verlag von Franz Kirchheim, Mainz, 29. Auflage, 1874. The poem Entsagen is found on pp. 112-113.
The text is the same as that I had copied on Hans Roelofs' webpage. I will check the spelling tomorrow and correct it on Entsagen, WAB 14, if required.
Thanks. Changed. In fact the title of the 1st version was longer: Musikalischer Versuch nach dem Kammer-Styl über ein kurzes Gedicht für Sänger mit Begleitung des Pianoforte. The title of the 2nd version was slightly modified: Musikalischer Versuch nach dem Kammer-Styl über ein Gedicht für Sing-Partien und Pianoforte-Begleit. (sic)... --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 16:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice pun: I didn't find it all right and said so ;) (I just made sure I didn't even quote the speech itself.) The link is on my user page, under "flower", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:08, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeats
Hi Gerda, regarding the student edits at W. B. Yeats, my concerns go much beyond whether or not an infobox is there or not. Given that the students are working on a specific time schedule and that they're getting a grade for their work, I think we should put aside the issue of infoboxes until they're finished with the school term, because it perpetuates an issue that has nothing at all to do with their work but instead is an internal WP conflict. Thanking them is, of course, nice, but also reinforces that what they are doing is correct (and by extension that I'm being bitey). All literature students must follow certain formatting rules and guidelines when writing off-line, done according to a specific style-guide, and my feeling is that equally if they are to edit an FA here they should be aware of our MoS in regards to sectioning, TOC, etc. etc. Thanks, Victoria (tk) 18:15, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: Victoria, I didn't even address you. I found it quite generous that you partly restored the students' work. My one comment was questioning Slim Virgin's comment, and recommending to the students to brake work up in small edits with precise edit summaries. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I completely restored the student work. That you say I partly restored it (because I didn't restore the infobox) tells me where this is going. Fwiw, since I've been editing here in 2009, I've been bringing WP into the classroom. In all those years not a single student has shown any enthusiasm to edit on their own but we do edit as a class (I have a class project that I have to finish today), so I have great sympathy for students who have to edit with a deadline. In fact I'm strongly opposed to it, and think that we should really stop and think before giving out thanks messages when something completely different is being said on the talk. It's a stressful time of year for students and the last thing they need is our squabbling. I think your message (thanks) undermines what I and SlimVirgin are trying to get across. Victoria (tk) 19:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. I suppose I'll drop this and have to apologize for posting here in the first place. Students' stress is my perception; it's what I see daily in my job at this time of year. Editing Wikipedia is not easy, editing an FA even less easy. As you know. As I said, I think when two editors who are familiar with the sources, and who have brought several similar articles successfully through FAC, see problems and yet the students receive a thanks for an edit from another editor it could cause mixed messages. But I could be wrong. Anyway, sorry to have bothered you. Victoria (tk) 22:54, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Misunderstanding? You didn't bother me, you made me think ;) - If you want to do me a favour, you might be a little less wordy to these students about the troubles of some past I don't really share and about which to know possibly doesn't help them. See also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for reviewing my (again poor) translation. This was the last page on the cantatas. The other Weltliche Chorwerke are indeed, as Derek Watson wrote, "of little concern to the non-German listener". Eight of them were recorded first by Mancusi. Twenty of them and the five Lieder were recorded later by Kerbl. For twelve of the remaining Weltliche Chorwerke there is no recording currently available.
I will perhaps write later an overview page "Weltliche Chorwerke and Lieder", similar as the previous one on the motets, as well as overview pages on "Piano and organ works".
I will now review in depth the pages on the motets. Hans Roelofs reviewed already a few of them and made some suggestions to me for improvement.
That on the Weltliche Chorwerke will be more tedious to create. I have already a very first draft. I think that I will not add the info about the location of the manuscripts, in order to be not too fastidious .... --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 14:31, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Hafspajen (talk) 07:23, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can confirm that this is right, also that I didn't ask for reverts. I can also confirm that I more or less unwatched that article. I personally have nothing against two articles as two views on a topic. Look at The Creation (Haydn) and The Creation structure, complimenting each other, - nobody requested a merge. - I confirm (again) that we had no edit war on BWV 243a, - a request for sources is legitimate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If both of you can agree on the permalink to the "right" version, I'll do the revert/restore or whatever and if it's beyond my abilities, I'll ping Yngvadottir or Drmies to fix it. Montanabw(talk)21:19, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is no right version, or will there ever be, always room for improvement ;) - revert the last revert and take discussion from there, forward. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Yngvadottir:@Montanabw:@Drmies: FYI this is the "last revert" about which Gerda suggests: "revert the last revert and take discussion from there, forward"
BTW, that revert had not only re-introduced "merge" material that should have been kept out per Drmies' closures, it had also re-introduced unsourced/erroneous material, and removed well-sourced material... --Francis Schonken (talk) 04:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning. I reverted. Now please work on accepting that an article on the first version exists which is not perfect but decent enough to link to;) - It works the other way round. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
* an overview page "Works for piano", in which I will also put the "Abendklänge, WAB 110" for violin and piano. I will classify it in the section "Chamber" of {{Anton Bruckner}}
* an overview page "Works for organ". In which section would it be classified?
* a descriptive page on the "Military march, WAB 116", with a note on the "Apollo March, WAB 115", a composition of Bela Keler, which Grasberger wrongly attributed to Bruckner. I propose to classify it in the section "Other orchestral".
Abendklänge (called in French "Harmonies du soir". I translated it as "Evening sounds") is a very short piece (duration lees than 1.5 min), with only two recordings, one by Kerbl and another on YouTube. In addition, the contribution of the violin is minimal - two reasons why I put it with the piano works.
Fine as is, there will not be many links I guess, - which would be a reason (for me) to have a separate page. I hate it to arrive in the middle of a page, not even seeing the title. Perhaps try translations of the more poetic titles? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Next ones will be an overview page "Organ works (Bruckner)" and a page "Military march (Bruckner)". NB: I will also look for translations of the other poetic titles.
Edit of Carmen
You edit of my Carmen was wrong, The changes I made were fairly well known to american audiences and are in some cases their best exposure to songs from carmen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardform (talk • contribs)
Put in a new secondary "Other works" below "Motets", in which I have also transferred the Aequali.
I do not think that there is one good for an article. Very strange that Bruckner, who was a famous organist, has composed only a few small organ works! If you compare with César Franck...
I have the pleasure to let you know the page Military march (Bruckner) is created. This was the last page to be created. All Bruckner's compositions have now a page or an overview page. I will now review all the pages one by one and correct, implement and update them if appropriate. Hopefully I will get Uwe Harten's Bruckner Handbuch as a present of my children at the end of this year.
Be proud! Minor: mention the Apollo in the lead, and place it after Music of the other, please. Is the name Military March? (then all capital) Militärmarsch? (then move) - or generic Marsch or no name? (then Marsch, WAB 116)
The name is Marsch in e-Moll, WAB 116. I have named the page "Military march" so that there would be no confusion with the other "March" (the orchestral Marsch in g-Moll, WAB 96), one of the Four Orchestral Pieces composed three years before.
Whatever, - I was not prepared to any Apollo in the middle of the other ;) (and then return to music of the first). You could say "Marsch, WAB 116" vs. "Marsch, WAB 96", to match Ave Maria, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But, cherries also can appear in Christian folktales. Thus, in an old English Christmas carol, we are told how Joseph and Virgin Mary were walking through a cherry orchard and Mary (the mother of Jesus) asked for Joseph to pick her some delicious cherries. But Joseph refused, saying that she should ask the one who "brought thee with child" to pick the cherries for her instead of him. On that moment, the yet unborn Christ communicated with the cherry trees and asked them to lower their branches in order for Mary to pick cherries, and that happened, and Joseph repented for his attitude.
Read more at Buzzle: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/the-symbolism-of-fruits.html
Gerda the Paradise cherry might come from some of the Spanish books. The article is loosely based on the Spanish article, and it is probably in some of the books they used. I guess they should be added if I haven't domne it yet, (check) as AGF source. But we better not make it a hook. Hafspajen (talk) 17:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Much amused, rather impressed and thoroughly disapproving that you are familiar with this disreputable concoction, though I admit I like it a lot. Tim riley talk19:31, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Tim, for your admiration of another inspired (and literary and cultured) work of the author of Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes: a refutation! I found the spout first on the page of a friend of mine ;) - Once you are here: what do you think constitutes edit-warring? So far I thought 3 additions (or reverts) of the same thing the same day, but I may be wrong? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the kit on sale as a cleverly bound book in Hatchard's bookshop in Piccadilly last week, with top, middle and bottom sections independently bound, enabling the reader to switch randomly, but of course it has been around in various forms online for years. Don't look here for any wisdom about WP rules, Gerda! I plod on and hope for the best. When I encounter what I think is perverse opposition I say so, but otherwise I try to keep out of strife. Ever thine, Tim riley talk23:28, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, especially for your hope for the best. Hoping the same, I would like your wisdom about said friend having been accused of edit-warring where she made a single edit. I know there's no justice on Wikipedia, but strive for a bit more fairness ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Free download for Mac: [90] ".. uses a special randomized table of shakespearean insults from over 100,000 possibilities! insult yourself incessantly with Shakespeare's vivid insults, impress your friends with your superior intelligence when you call them a "cockered hell-hated flax-wench" or "mammering weather-bitten strumpet"!" Martinevans123 (talk) 23:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bruckner's last page created?
Dear Bruckner,
Is Bruckner's last page actually created? There is a somewhat mysterious work, the authenticity of which is still controversial: the Symphonisches Präludium of c. 1876. It has not been put in the Gesamtausgabe because Nowak also doubted about its authenticity. The work has been attributed to Mahler, Krzyzanowski, Hans Rott and other Bruckner's pupils.
On the German Wikipedia there is a detailed page on it, probably because Hiltl and Cohrs are convinced that it is a work by Bruckner...
I had already put a quite detailed paragraph on this work on the page Anton Bruckner.
I have the performance by Neeme Järvi of the "Mahlerised" orchestration by Gürsching of the piano transcription, which indeed looks Mahler's, as well as two performances of 2010 by Baldur Bronnimann and Markus Stenz according to the original orchestral setting (Krzyzanowski's copy), which indeed likes much more Bruckner's. Recently a performance of the original orchestral setting by Michelle Perrin Blair has been commercially issued.
It is indeed an exciting story, nearly a soap opera! This "Symphonic prelude" is a curious work, a real mix of Bruckner's earlier symphonies Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and also 5 (the fugato likes on that of the finale of symphony No. 5), which is pre-shadowing symphony No. 9 and even its sketched finale. I agree with Cohrs' guesses, that the work was presumably sketched by Bruckner and given to his pupil Krzyzanowski as an exercise of orchestration, and was thereafter "forgotten".
I have removed the subtitle "Thirty years later" and added other ones, so that writers could better follow the succession of events:
Better. First, we need to find a way to summarize all this in the lead. Can we have "by Bruckner" in the infobox without mentioning the question mark some would add? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:29, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The lead on the German Wikipedaia is ass follows: "Das Symphonische Praeludium in c-Moll ist eine Orchesterkomposition aus dem Umfeld des österreichischen Komponisten Anton Bruckner. Die Rezeptionsgeschichte des kurz nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg aufgefundenen Werkes ist unübersichtlich und führte zur Zuschreibung einer instrumentierten Sekundärfassung an Gustav Mahler, die bis heute in der Musikpraxis dominiert, obwohl die Komposition mit hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit von Bruckner selbst stammt." If I add a translation of its second sentence, is then OK? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:50, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you OK if I add the following: "The retrieval history of the work, which was discovered short after World War II, is quite confused. Tschuppik, basing his argument on the retrieved orchestral score by Bruckner's pupil Krzyzanowski, attributed the authorship of the work to Anton Bruckner. Thirty years later, Paul Banks, basing his argument on a four-stave reduction of the work, attributed the authorship to Gustav Mahler and asked for a re-orchestration of it. However, based on the original orchestral score, it appears that the work was more presumably at least sketched by Bruckner."? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 14:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest: "The work was discovered short after World War II. Tschuppik (explain if not mentioned before) attributed the authorship to Anton Bruckner, based on the retrieved orchestral score by Bruckner's pupil Krzyzanowski. Thirty years later, Paul Banks (as above) knew only a four-stave reduction of the work, therefore attributed the authorship to Gustav Mahler and asked for an orchestration of it. Based on the original orchestral score, it seems likely that the work was at least sketched by Bruckner, possibly as an exercise in orchestration for his pupil K." ? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, you got around ;) - thank you for doing something revolutionary: introduce the phrase "common sense" in arbitration. If you get elected - you may not, because of that - keep it up there ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:25, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still here :)
Hey there, thanks for the nice note. I'm still here although i don't get the time to edit much. Thanks again for your gentle thoughts. -EliasZ06:51, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would if it mattered, - in this case, however, it was a very general question which had been on my mind before you worded it, - actually since I replaced motet by cantata. - Define "noticeboard". You will have noticed that I rarely go to project talks classical music and opera, and never to an administrator noticeboard unless called there. - Finally: the way from your lovely tag to the talk of said page isn't too complicated I would think. Thanks for advertising the article, btw. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Re. "...if it mattered" – well it matters... "in order to avoid duplicate discussions, and/or something that might look somewhat like WP:FORUMSHOPping, and/or fragmentation of discussion, etc." as I said above. Please make clear in which of the two places you prefer to have the discussion on that topic, and link the other place to that discussion, tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 14:09, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have no preference. You (!) asked in a position where people will possibly not look. I think it is a general question worthy to be discussed in a more general forum, - it's also just a factual question while I understand forum shopping rather as means to serve personal interests, like collecting votes. Keep simple, please. In case of an answer, I am willing to connect to the other question. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Please make clear in which of the two places you prefer to have the discussion on that topic, and link the other place to that discussion, tx." – keep simple please, tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Please make clear in which of the two places you prefer to have the discussion on that topic, and link the other place to that discussion, tx." (bolding added) --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I'm afraid the discussion is getting too derailed at Frietjes talk page, and I prefer not to clutter up other peoples talkpages too much, but I did want to respond to you about the compromise part, because I have strong feelings about it. What I view as one of the most important parts of Wikipedia, and wikis in general, is the ability to collaboratively build something. The importance in seeking compromise is in my opinion not watering down a position, but if one side proposes x, and another proposes y, to find an alternative z that may be completely different, that satisfies what both sides really want. That can be really hard, and it's really easy for me to say, since I'm ashamed to admit I hardly do any content work. If we succeed in doing it though, we're truly collaborating in that we as a community manage to do better than the sum of the parts. When we fail at that, we have to make do with meeting in the middle, which is the poorer solution. Sometimes even that isn't an option, and we have to make a choice between two binary options. I believe that if people would try more often to get to the first option of finding a different way that satisfies all parties, we would have less conflict in general. To me, it's always worth it to try to find a compromise where neither side has to give up what they really want, even if it turns out that no such compromise can be found. Best, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:46, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for coming over, and I agree with everything you say. For others interested in my page: the related discussion was this. I think some people will agree that I am willing to go for z if I see one. However, a good story about compromise was from duo Yo-Yo Ma and Emanuel Ax, asked what they do if they don't agree on a tempo. Answer: we play it one day his tempo, one day my tempo, because a tempo in between would be good for none of us. - Some people will agree that I am willing to collaborate, even with users with whom I can't compromise on certain topics. - To believe that another user is not willing to compromise sounds a bit like lack of good faith to me, but I am not sure if I could express what I mean. - I am sorry, but no compromise is in sight for A Boy was Born. Reminder to self: a relevant discussion is on La voix humaine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gerda, I don't understand this edit summary at all ... in some ways my latest edit made the article more closely reflect what the source said (in terms of the IMSLP link ... with the MP3 file it's kinda irrelevant). Graham8714:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I think I understand what you were aiming at. However I'm not aware of any classical music articles that use IMSLP descriptions in that way. It seems a bit redundant to me, because it's perfectly clear that the link leads to the score of the piece that the article's about. Graham8714:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All my articles quote what the library says, even if wrong. If it's terribly wrong, I don't use the template, but write my own link ;) - The library uses the name the sonata is known by, it might as well be shown, together with "our" (not mine) wish for house style and consistency. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That episode is so depressing - so predictable, and yet so deeply stupid - that I'm closer than I've been in a while to giving up on the whole place. Your support helped. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:52, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, how do I not already have your talk page watchlisted Gerda? We keep bumping into each other via one thing or the other, it only seems natural. Secondly, Floquenbeam I'm sorry if I came across rather brash earlier. I really dislike bad faith assumptions right off the bat. I seriously dislike blocks - they need to be used as a last resort each and every time they're used. I don't want to debate the validity of the block any further. Your efforts to deescalate the situation show that you're a kind and caring admin, something of a rarity around here. We need more people like you. Dusti*Let's talk!*21:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Good Morning" Gerda Arendt: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia! 13 December is the day when Swedes perplex the rest of the world by showing up way too early in the morning dressed in white tunics, candles in their hair, singing and bringing saffron buns and breakfast in bed to nice people. Hope you have a bright day! –
w.carter-Talk 00:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC) Hafspajen (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wish things had not been framed that way. Someone thought they could go after Eric Corbett and it boomeranged with the result that a troll got banned. The fact that that particular troll happened to be a woman shouldn't have been the focus of the thing. Oh, but wait, same troll accused me of being a man. Such a confusing world in which we live... Montanabw(talk)04:18, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, I finally realised what you were trying to do on Narcissus and why, because I did not know you had moved the target page, so I fixed the redirect problem, although it was not really a problem.
I agree that the latter is more informative for containing the (de) tag, but I really do not like redlinks. I try very hard to replace them with actual pages. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that an article is better than a stub, which is better than an inter language link, which is better than a direct link to another language (they should not exist), which is better than a red link, which is better than no link if notability is there. I created several stubs instead of ill (3 yesterday), but ill is the next best thing to do, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I moved it to Katharinenkirche, Nuremberg and established the connection to the other languages by going to German and adding it.
Yes I had to throw something together in a bit of a rush, before going out, but somehow I knew you would not be able to resist having a go at it. :) Danke schön --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:27, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(I usually reply on my own talk page, but I'm replying here since the former is a bit cluttered.)
Thank you for the note, Gerda. I wasn't around during this Raul debacle, so it's good to hear some different opinions to clue me in. It seems to me that some people just leave or become inactive because they are busy with 'real-life' pursuits. Your note also proved my assumption that we're all pretty neurotic around here!
In any event, it seems quite clear to me that Raul's absence has nothing whatever to do with the current mini-controversy over the TFA. Raul's decisions were always consensus-driven, if I remember correctly, so I believe that the article would have been featured today anyway. Not to mention that those who scream "pruriency!" are usually unconcerned with how things actually work.
Thank you! - I wouldn't even call a "debacle" when someone (as linked) calmly reports about life with cats. - Today's article was about a book, right? - See also. Off to rehearsal, Gloria, but that's for after Christmas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have added to the selected discography of 8 motets (In jener letzten der Nächte (choir setting), Tantum ergo WAB 42 (second version), Ave Maria WAB 6, Afferentur regi, Inveni David, Locus iste, Tota pulchra es, and Ecce sacerdos magnus) the CD/DVD of the Benefizkonzert Karmeliternkirche Linz of 2006 issued by the Cantores Carmeli, because the conductor Michael Stenov has also put these 8 motets on YouTube, with the sung text on the video. The readers, who does not have a CD with the concerned motets, can so enjoy them.
Apart of their CD/DVD the Cantores Carmeli have also put their Christus factus est WAB 11 of 2007 on YouTube[92]. Should I also mention it?
There are good live performance on YouTube of the Requiem by Maija Breiksa (2012), Mass No. 1 by the DePaul Community Chorus (2012), Mass No. 2 by the Universtätschor München (2012), and Mass No. 3 by Igor Andrieskiy (2008). I will also put links to these performances on the Wikipedia pages. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:45, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I have added also live performances of
the Windhaager Messe by Pagliarini,
parts of the Messe für den Gründonnerstag : Christus factus est by the Choir Exultate, Dextera Domini by Oligotett Con So Nett and Sanctus, Benedictus & Agnus Dei by the Cantores Carmeli. Unfortunately, there is no live performance available of the Credo.
The "cleaning lady of TFA" blushes ;) - Did you know that I once scheduled an article? - Getting rid of the points was a dream come true, the templated requests another. - I could imagine just one simple calendar list where requests go and get discussed, an extended pending list ... - but don't want to limit your imagination ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, feel free to suggest anything at WT:TFA. Brian and Crisco are handling scheduling, I'm checkling lead sections at FAC and writing the TFA sections for the Main Page (and learning a lot about Bencherlite's writing style, I plan to copy him). - Dank (push to talk) 21:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I found that writing blurb is quite a challenge, if you want to keep the author's (sometimes flowery) style AND get the essential facts in the small frame. DYK is a good practise for that ;) - Did you see today's? 4 days between writing and appearing, that's rare these days. - 2015 looks off to a good start ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have also added good performances from YouTube of the Te Deum (Montserrat, 2010) and the Psalm 150 (DePaul Community, 2012), as well as of the following motets: Libera me WAB 22, Pange lingua WAB 33, Iam lucis orto sidere (3rd setting), Salvum fac populum tuum and the four Tantum ergo WAB 41 (1888 version). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Christmas greetings for 2014, and best wishes for 2015. Let's continue to help each other – here's to another year's successful editing, more Bach cantatas, more identiboxes, and down with the trolls, vandals and bores. Peace on earth and goodwill to all! Brianboulton (talk) 19:24, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda
First, my compliments for the season, and my apologies for raising Cain so close to Christmas. You gave me a lot to mull over a week or so ago (though real life has stopped me replying sooner) when you reverted an edit I made on The Rite of Spring (on which I have opened a discussion, btw); not just that, but your user page, containing your hit list (I've made some responses to the ones that interest me; you'll find them all on my contributions page, though you've already noticed them, I think). But I think I am mostly taking issue with your notion that the English WP would be improved if it was written more in German (which I have also addressed, in a general way, at the WP:GERMANY talk page. Anyway, see you around, Moonraker12 (talk) 11:54, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about contradicting you every now and then, especially now refuting that I think "that the English WP would be improved if it was written more in German". All I believe is that we might keep German (Latin ...) names in German (Latin ...), rather than trying to translate not very precise names to something even less precise. - We say Gloria, and people understand. Peace ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gerda Arendt, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing, starship.paint ~¡Olé!03:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an AwesomeHoliday and a HappyNewYear, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 02:35, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Best wishes for a happy holiday season II
Happy Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an AwesomeHoliday and a HappyNewYear, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 02:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination of Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a
Best christmas and new year. Another year down, and so much more to write. Thanks for all your contribuitions and being part of the community. Hope January is at least resonabally tolerable for you. Ceoil (talk) 09:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for an image I particularly love, and your inspiring words! I did a few things for Christmas this year, BWV 243a (on the Main page now), St. Cecilia Mass (new, just a start, - couldn't believe we had no article yet, sang it in the service today) and A Boy was Born (will be on the German Main page tomorrow, when we still celebrate). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:53, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed (though not the St Cecilia). Christmas is wonderful in your part of the world; I have many fond childhood memories of it. Have a sip of Glühwein and a nibble of Lebkuchen for me! Can't get those here. And enjoy your day. Victoria (tk) 14:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Chris Troutman (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Season's greetings and Christmas wishes to you Gerda. I noticed you left a message on my talk and then undid the same. If there's anything else I can assist you with, feel free to ask. Great to see you around. WifioneMessage15:57, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Seasonal Greets!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!
Hello Gerda Arendt, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing, TheGeneralUser (talk) 23:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 28 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Margot (opera), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that music from Joaquin Turina's opera Margot(libretto cover pictured) about a Parisian courtesan has become a popular piece during the processions of Holy Week in Seville? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Margot (opera). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I know about misery, and the trap it represents. I try to keep a positive outlook, but it can be hard. The Lord places challenges in our life to make us shine in the end. I just wish I was able to see the end result during the trial. I did have a smile on my face after googeling the music at the top of your user page. I think I will try and do some work tomorrow and play some of it in the background. AlbinoFerret02:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the recognition for my article work. It has spurred me on to make sure that I am more productive in 2015 (providing I can find the time to log on!) It really means a lot when someone gives credit for contributions - no matter how small their edits. I hope we are able to work in collaboration elsewhere (though I have no doubt we shall disagree further as we fight to improve the encyclopaedia in our own way). Please keep up your fantastic work in encouraging editors.
Thank you! Disagreement is normal, and fine if the other person's point of view is respected. I don't perceive myself as fighting, but that's of course wrong, as our highest authority proclaimed ;) - Looking closer at my own actions, I find that I do fight if I see an innocent victim in danger. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:32, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment
I thought I'd reply to your comments at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment here, since it's a bit off-topic. Yes, reducing the number of templates can be beneficial but that's not always the case. For example, Andy has now nominated {{Infobox Rome episode}} for deletion (again). In the process, and regardless of the outcome of the TfD, he has removed code from the template that now opens the way for somebody to justifiably create two additional templates. Andy has a narrow focus and doesn't always look at the big picture. As for your statement about always using {{Infobox person}}, that's great in theory but there are 213 templates in Category:People infobox templates and you'll see resistance in some projects to that template. I've seen far too much resistance to using Infobox person in musician articles and other projects insist you use "their" template. Instead of making a minimal template that can be embedded in Infobox person they insist on a full infobox that usually concentrates on project specific fields instead of the normal fields we see in BLPs. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reducing where appropriate is always beneficial, just in a few cases it may not be appropriate. - As for person, I use that one only (practically, not in theory), especially for classical composers. (There, you are not asked to use "their" template, but to use no infobox at all, - see Talk:Beethoven#Infobox.) I don't tell others to do the same, and accept that there are different possible ways. - The clarification is about Andy only being restricted regarding articles, not deletions and merges also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: Now that I read your comment over there, "Andy has a narrow focus when it comes to templates", I am tempted to respond once more, but not enough, - I try to stick to two comments in whatever discussion. Consider to think about it and perhaps modify, especially on the background of "Comments here should be directed only at the above proposed amendment." (To be honest I fail to see what your whole comment has to do with the clarification.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm well aware of the issues with classical composer articles. Remember this discussion? "Where appropriate" is key, but because Andy doesn't look at the big picture, his nominations are not always appropriate. He has nominated templates for deletion, with a recommendation to be converted to a wrapper, but a wrapper is still a template, so nothing is really being achieved in the long run. In cases such as {{Infobox Rome episode}} he's nominated it for deletion and removed code that will pretty much ensure that two templates are created. If the infobox is deleted we'll then have two templates to replace part of it. If it isn't, we'll have three. I thought the relevance of my comments was obvious. Others have argued that no clarification is needed but, as I said, people see Andy nominating and renominating infoboxes for deletion. They assume, since he is indefinitely banned from discussing the removal of infoboxes", that he has violated that restriction as TfD is effectively discussing the removal of infoboxes. If the restriction applies only to articles, then it needs to be clarified to prevent more AE requests being filed. On its own, the occasional nomination is no big deal but Andy nominates and renominates so many that he upsets a lot of people, which is why his actions are more likely to result in an AE request being filed. Clearly, clarification is needed to head off such things. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:56, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Repeating: I fail to see any of this relevant to the current (!) clarification request. Some have "assumed" in previous requests for enforcement that the restriction was for more than articles, always dismissed. The request is to clearly say it's only for articles. - That some wish it were different is known well enough, see post by Francis for example. It would take an altogether different process to change to include other than articles, as should also be known by now. - Keep in mind that the arbs are tired of the topic, change in a few days, - and look at Talk:Beethoven#Infobox: the infobox wars are over. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: I asked the candidates for arbitration, and was pleased with the answers, especially those of the ones later elected, bottom line: "no foul, play on". A good motto for the new year ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Happy New Year!
Thanks for making this year a little happier for me. Wishing you all a wondrous 2015, and hope to cross paths more frequently here on WP. Best! Julie JSFarman (talk) 16:14, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
lam lucis orto sidere DYK
Hello! Your submission of Iam lucis orto sidere, WAB 18 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! RHM22 (talk) 04:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
P.s., I know that Réginald was the author of this article, but I'm leaving this here since you're the nominator. I hope you're having a nice last few days of the year!-RHM22 (talk) 04:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Hi, Gerda. Happy Christmas and a joyous New Year to you! I have been recording some unaccompanied ballads this summer and singing much better since I had a wisdom tooth out on the top left. I tried to get the dentist to remove the one on the other side but apparently it is unethical, so my resonance is slightly lop-sided! However the Tibetan chanting through the Great Scale is working wonders for my Zen as well as my vocal production. Are you listening to Bostridge on Winterreise (Radio 4 this week)? I hope you are on top form and making sweet music Eebahgum (talk) 04:20, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for sharing singing! Mine on top until tomorrow. Jenkins is rather rough, less sweet, 2015 plans include Bach Missa, Jenkins Gloria and Te Deum, Rossini mass, Mozart and Fauré Requiem, the letter exceptionally sweet, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
New Year 2015 Greetings
Wishing you a Prosperous 2015!!!
Hello , New Year begins, let us pray that it will be a year with New Peace, New Happiness and abundance of new friends, God bless you through out the New Year.--Nvvchar. 02:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I support most of it, but I am happy with my old friends, some banned, some who left, some with ideas that came too soon, some regarded as incivil ... ;) - My own greetings are in the making and will be posted up here when the new year begins, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My share: I moved to Nuffel, made redirect from Van Nuffel, fixed links (at least all in articles and archives, - was mentioned on DYK twice, once with a New Year's cantata ;) - You are free to make the present redirect to an article or disamb page, if needed. You could also just apply a hat note to Rameau for now. Follow the links to the Nuffel setting for surroundings where Rameau should also be mentioned, - not my personal memories, of course ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gerda! I wish you a very happy, healthy and contributive new year. Making an article about the text, and then two separate articles, seems a good idea, I will return to this in the next day or two. Best, --Smerus (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the good wishes which I return, adding peaceful and playful (found dealing with Arbitration clarification, of all places)! All you have to do if you want to write on the text is replace the current redirect. I will write on a different text tomorrow ;) - was just listening to Toccata and Fugue in D minor, BWV 565 on our church organ, with pleasure, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook). To use this template, leave {{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}} on someone else's talk page.
Scotland: there are many unique customs associated with the New Year. These form the Scottish celebration Hogmanay—the Scots name for New Year's Eve. The street party in Princes Street in Edinburgh is one famous example.
Wales: Calennig is celebrated, with celebrations attracting thousands of people to the capital, Cardiff.
Michael Q. Schmidttalkbackis wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - MQS
On 30 December 2011 the article became a GA, thanks to Ched, PumpkinSky and MathewTownsend, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
; see Talk:Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172 for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 21:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Patrice Chéreau for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Like Montanabw(talk) 00:51, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Magnificat (Schütz) 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! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Done — both of you! — Excellent! — Gareth— | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 13:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
- no problem, thanks for pointing out we missed the month change ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome! Hyacinth (talk) 00:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
— | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 10:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. You are a good editor. Just came back to give you a kiss. 
appreciated. I'll' be back. I'm BracketBot. I love you still.
I'll' be back for your Jägermeister anyway. User:BracketBot informs.BracketBot (talk) 20:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
. I looked through the previous recipents and I feel honored to be listed among so many editors whom I respect. What a great way to start my weekend! Mojoworker (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
See you around, Mz7 (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
wwwwwww
Why has this man that paper on his head?
This Shepherd?
since it is about woman, I could think of a woman in the picture
Why isn't he comming??? (Joke...)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Rosengarten Eltville
for translations
for dreams
Rosa Elmshorn (by W. Kordes' Söhne, a truly great rosarian 1951)
.JPG)
Hello. You have a new message at Prayerfortheworld's talk page. Message added 05:09, 12 July 2014 (UTC).
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. betafive 05:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
Done w.carter-Talk 09:47, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
_H%C3%B6fisches_Fest_in_einem_Lustgarten.jpg)
; see Talk:St John Passion structure for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 16:43, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Fylbecatulous talk 17:36, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[70]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Box_of_matches.jpg){kind=link}
![[80]](http://imslp.org/wiki/File:TN-Buxtehude,_Dietrich,_Mit_Fried_und_Freud,_BuxWV_76,_FE,_Colour.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
In very much appreciation. Fylbecatulous talk 13:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
