Jump to content

User talk:JackofOz/Archive 22

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cairo Symphony Orchestra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Munch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Music, The Brain, And Ecstasy: How Music Captures Our Imagination

I have to thank you for recommending this at the ref desk, it's one of the top ten books I have read in the last decade. μηδείς (talk) 20:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

You're very welcome, Medeis. It's little known, and I came across it purely by chance, but everyone I've recommended it to is amazed by its insights. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 21:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

"Schizoid"

Hi Jack. You make some good points, but could I please ask you to remove the unnecessary and potentially offensive uses of "schizoid"? Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 21:10, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 21:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 06:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

A favour to ask

I've been having problems with my WP email. Could you pop over to my user page and send me an amusing test message.

Thanks Bielle

Ode to Joy

I read aloud your description of the key changes in this part of the 9th to my husband. He is always on about how much more complex jazz is than classical. He was laughing from about the 5th key change to the finish. I don't think I will hear much more about jazz in the near future. (We both love classical, and jazz, and I am much involved in the folk music world, but neither of us is a musician.) Thanks for the break in the day. Regards Bielle (talk) 23:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

(copied from there) Thanks for the excellent summary of what we sang yesterday with great joy, the 9th on the 9th of the 9th! (Where did I write recently that the last movement of the Mass in B minor also is in D major?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
adding: the review. How do I say best in English that we singers "threw ourselves full of dedication into the 'Ode an die Freude'" - like in a river. (as usually: many words in that review about things other than the performance, start in the end) For images see Unionskirche, Idstein. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Fletcher Jones

In your article on Sir (David) Fletcher Jones, you state that "Although he had always expressed Labor sympathies in word and deed, he publicly renounced his political allegiances when the Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam and his wife Margaret made it known they were agnostics". I was just wondering what your sources were for this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.122.80.40 (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for the query. At this remove, I can't say exactly where I got it from when I wrote the article in March 2007, but it's certainly confirmed at Fletcher Jones's Australian Dictionary of Biography entry:
  • He was appointed O.B.E. in 1959, and knighted in 1974 for services to decentralization and the community, an honour long delayed by the Liberal era, it was thought, because of his clear Labor sympathies and his alternative business practices. Reports of the Whitlams' agnosticism, however, caused him publicly to renounce his political allegiance.
I have to say the sentence you quoted has hallmarks of a cut and paste (shameful!) from another source, because the first part of it doesn't feel like something I would have come up with myself. That suggests it's mentioned elsewhere.
Cheers. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 20:22, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Military and Patriotism

What a curious threat Medeis left! It sounds very much like "Do it my way or I'm telling Daddy and he will take all your toys away". When the grandchildren start whining like this, it is sure sign they need a nap. Bielle (talk) 04:30, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Had you seen this before you made your comment on the Ref Desk talk page, or were we just on a similar wavelength? Bielle (talk) 04:44, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Nope. Great minds and all that. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 04:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Luciana Arrighi

Nice work on the expansion/sourcing! Lugnuts And the horse 06:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Cheers. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 08:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Brandenburg Concerto #3 In G Major -scored for mandolin, banjo, guitar and the usual panoply of strings.

I loved this; Antandrus loved it; perhaps you will too. Tell me you didn't smile, and I won't believe you. :>) Bielle (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, how excellent! Thank you for sharing, Bielle. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 19:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

talk page comments

The o'clock issue dealt (1) with a confusion over the substance of the question, and (2) your accusation of bad faith you had made on the project page itself. For those two reasons, it should have been addressed on the project page. In the current kerfuffle, my accuser could simply have asked me, "did you mean to be rude?" on my talk page, and I would have explained I believed the

was itself quite insulting. Instead, he went elsewhere to talk about me behind my back without notifying me. Note also, there is no discussion of the ref desk question itself in the current complaint, while that was part of our discussion. Note I answered you several times in good faith on my talk page, and only suggested we keep it to the ref desk page after several thousand spilt bytes. I consider both matters closed, but am answering you in good faith, since you asked the question. μηδείς (talk) 03:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. The wider context of that exchange was that, just as you did not directly accuse me of bad faith with your:
  • I am certain that this was explained clearly enough above; I hope you are not trying to play gotcha,
I did not directly accuse you of bad faith with my:
  • Please assume good faith. If someone says they don't understand, it's a bit rich to retort with "I am certain that this was explained clearly enough above". Clearly, it wasn't. Now, it has been. Thank you.. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 06:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Something that you may be interested in reading

Hi JackofOz,
Thought this might interest you, remembering your comments on Archbishop Duhig's name. The comments actually bring up something interesting: "Anglo-Celtic" elides the German (and mostly Catholic) migration to Australia.
--Shirt58 (talk) 12:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Shirt. Interesting reading. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 01:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Kia ora as our trans-tasman cousins say, Jack. Still trying to find a ref for Duhig's confirmation name. And also a belated "L'shana tova" for Rosh Hashanah, 5773 to you and yours.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:43, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Mazel tov, do svidaniya, prosit, and Happy Fathers Day. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 11:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Science Desk Response

for your info, left a reponse to your cat question on the science desk. Looks like it's about to get archived so thought I'd message you here in case you miss it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.168.88.74 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Responded there. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 01:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

an anecdote

Given your recent question to me on the lang desk I thought you might find this interesting. About 25-30 years ago, my Catholic diocese had a visiting Mexican priest. He gave the sermon one day on the topic of Jesus' 40 days in the desert. The priest, with a strong Spanish accent, asked, "And Hwy deed Cheeesus go eeen to dee dessayrt? Cheeesus went eeen to dee dessert beecause he wantit to fuck us. He wantit to fuckus hees thoughts on dee trials hee would be facing een dee coming year..." Needless to say you could tell who was actually listening to the sermon by the fact that besides myself three other parishioners raised their heads at his pronunciation of focus. μηδείς (talk) 01:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. Reminds me of the story often attributed to Madame De Gaulle, who, when asked what she'd be looking forward to now that her husband was retiring as President of France, said what sounded like "A penis". (I can relate to that.) -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 02:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I heard a version in the 90's on Charlie Rose, a public television talk show in the US, where, according to the British guest, Mrs. Mitterand dining with Elizabeth toasted "To the Queen's penis" and was corrected by her husband, "To 'er 'appiness. Ap...pi...ness...." The benefit of my anecdote is it was true, while snopes.com indicates the 'appiness anecdotes are fictional. Not so big an audience though. μηδείς (talk) 02:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Similar to WTC?

Hi Jack!

I came across the wikipedia page that it seems you've done most of the write-up for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_written_in_all_24_major_and_minor_keys#After_Bach

I was wondering where you got the sources for all these pieces, and, if you know if there are more past what is listed there (as the page states the list is incomplete). I'm doing a project looking for more pieces in the same vein, and would love to know of any others that aren't mentioned there.

Thanks in advance, Blackenedbutterfly (talk) 16:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for your interest.
Where did I get my sources? I presume you’ve seen the 132 citations at the bottom of the article. I found them all by simply hunting around the web using google, following up leads, and scouring all relevant sources in my own music/reference library. Not sure what else to tell you. Worthy of special mention is the IMSLP site, which contains a goldmine of information, with the added advantage that you can check the actual scores and see which key combination and which key sequence each composition uses. Because they're not set in stone, as I explain at some length.
Incomplete? The citation currently at No. 5, Bach Cantatas, claims that it contains “all known compositions of complete sets of preludes & fugues” and “all known complete sets of preludes or other works”. I drew on this source when creating my own list, but I found many other works they don’t mention. The dangers of claiming to be complete are readily apparent, so I haven’t gone there. I’ve found everything I can, but I’m sure there would still be other obscure works out there. I spent about 6 weeks working this article up to the point where I felt it was worthy of adding to Wikipedia. When I created it on 20 June, it had 112 citations, and I believed this would remain fairly steady. I soon came across 20 more. But I feel reasonably safe in claiming - here, not in the article - that I’ve captured all the works in this genre by major composers and/or that are likely to have been recorded. I know of no place, anywhere, where the subject is covered more comprehensively, put it that way. But I love surprises. If you come across anything I’ve missed, I hope you’ll add it in.
All the best with your project. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 20:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your response! The only set that I know of that I haven't seen listed here (but I do not know its key contents, i.e. whether it is in all 24 keys or a majority of them), is a set of 24 Fantasies by Charles Guillet (1610)
IMSLP has been a great resource for this project. Aside from that, we have access to RACER, which has proved invaluable in other cases where copyright still exists on the pieces.
Blackenedbutterfly (talk) 23:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm hopeless when it comes to pre-classical modes. I do know that there isn't always a direct correspondence between a mode and a key. I had a quick look at the Guillet score, but I can't make much sense out of it.
RACER? Never heard of that, and I couldn't find it via Google. Can you clarify? Cheers. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 00:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Masquerade (Khachaturian), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Suite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Grammar

Hello Jack, you were kind of enough to comment on my question posted here: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Paragraph_structure.2C_and_topic_sentences.2C_used_on_Wikipedia.

If you have the time, and motivation, could you possibly read this article: [[1]]? PeterWesco (talk) 04:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I have the time, but I lack the will to be involved in any articles that deal with such matters. Thanks for the offer. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 02:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

latsabidze, pianist

Hi, JackofOz: I would appreciate if you could look at this article and let me know if you have any suggestions when you get a chance. I made some corrections, fixed several sources and put in right formatting. I see you contributed a lot in some classical music articles. The deletion tag is still there, so let's see if we can fix it. Many thanks! Helen-Heller (talk) 08:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I've cleaned it up somewhat. Thanks for the barnstar. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 02:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks so much for edits, it makes sense, appreciate it! Helen-Heller (talk) 06:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your contributions! Helen-Heller (talk) 08:12, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, JackofOz. You have new messages at Double sharp's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Double sharp (talk) 12:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Your new sig

Sorry, Jack, I liked your old sig much better. Comic Sans is a really ugly font, and the yellow highlighting just draws one's eyes to it. Please switch it back, or to something new that's prettier! :-) Thanks! Angr (talk) 19:26, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, Angr. I was a little dissatisfied with the old one, and I've been experimenting with some other ideas over the past day or so. OK, so this one doesn't work. Next!
Cheers. -- Jack of Oz (Talk) 20:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Just for now I've changed it to : Jack of Oz [Talk] 20:07, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
The thing is, he changed from Papyrus, the second most hated font in the world, to Comic Sans, the most hated font of all. I was assuming it was an ironic act of deliberate bad taste, along with the aggressive yellow. On the other hand, it makes no sense that a font can be offensive: [2] and [3].  Card Zero  (talk) 23:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
He? Please don't talk over the top of me on my own talk page.
Your assumptions are groundless. There was no aggression, or deliberate intent to offend or do anything else. To me, the yellow is not aggressive, just bright and happy. One might even call it a very gay colour. When it comes to my own identity, I am the sole arbiter of taste, but I'm willing to change if my choices inadvertently cause a problem for others.
I'm aware that some typefaces are more favoured than others by the typographical community. Thing is, I'm not a member of that community and I'm not in the least affected by its peer pressure, because that's all it is.
  • "Think as I do, do as I do, like what I like, hate what I hate, be like me - only then will you be acceptable".
Or worse:
  • "I refuse to be like the common herd and I will do things my way, but then I will castigate anyone who doesn't do things my way, and I will gather around me my own common herd".
Such a childish approach to life. It's the Hell's Angels Syndrome writ small:
  • "I am the ultimate non-conformist; to prove it, I will obey the Hell's Angels Code even if it means killing people I have no personal beef with, so that I can remain in my leader's good books and maybe one day become the leader myself and lord it over other ultimate non-conformists". -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 23:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
(Sorry, just talking bollocks as always, don't mind me.) Similar things are often said about goths, or their cultural progeny the emos: to avoid being conformist, they all dress alike. This philosophical enigma must be alive and unresolved in the minds of huge numbers of people. Part of it is the difficult advice "be yourself": what if one's true self wants to fit in with the crowd, but one feels forced by peer pressure into an expression of individuality? Is there really such a thing as a true self, anyway? It might be better not to even worry about trying to be oneself.
(The first link was mainly for the cartoon at the bottom, and the second was for the bit about Goudy and Baskerville's fonts being reviled by their peers at the time - 1915 and 1757, respectively.)  Card Zero  (talk) 00:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
But I have to be somebody. Can I please be you? I wouldn't normally ask, but I'm obviously desperate.  :) We already share 4 letters in common. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 00:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Heh. My name is actually a complicated tribute to TenOfAllTrades (who, I take it, is one less than a Jack of all trades). Same general self-deprecating idea, different set of cards.  Card Zero  (talk) 00:40, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
That particular yellow is the colour of the highlighting in all my MBA texts. It screams at me: look at me; remember me; I am very important. I don't think that is the message you are wanting to convey, but . . . Perhaps grad students in Oz use pink or blue. Bielle (talk) 00:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Well it's obviously noticeable, but "Notice me! Don't you know who I am!" was never the idea. If my words alone (maybe with extremely sparse and very infrequent and absolutely minimal embellishments by way of italics, underline, bold) don't get their point across, making the author the centre of attention won't help. Some of the new versions I tried out included this, this and this.
Grad students? No idea, never been one. I was lucky to just become a graduate. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 01:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Shakespeare's lofty piques

Hi, Jack. Can't help with anything useful on Shakespeare translations, but you happened to hit on a spelling bête noire of mine: peaked, peeked, piqued. Interest is "piqued", in the sense of being stimulated, not "peaked", as in, perhaps heightened. Now you too can annoy friends with useless pedantry at parties. :) - Nunh-huh 06:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations, Nunh-huh, you've spotted the deliberate error (or some such vapid and vacuous obfuscation).
Please continue to keep me on my toes. I don't like being found flat-footed about this sort of thing. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 07:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
It's a bit ironic that Shakespeare scholars would be persnickety about spelling, when Shakespeare seems never to have spelled his name the same way twice... - Nunh-huh 14:05, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Verily. But don't be too hard on him. It's a bit of a challenge to spell "Oxford" with the letters available in "Shakespeare".  :) -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 19:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bille Brown, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Hare (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Great edit summary

I really enjoyed your comment in relation to the Bob Carr article. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:03, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick. I appreciate it. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 10:08, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Classical music edit-a-thon

Hi Jack, a few of us are organising a classical music edit-a-thon between 8-14 October with the theme Music of France, to coincide with the ABC Classic FM countdown. There will be a meetup in Sydney Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/October 2012, but the hard work will be done online, somehow. Hope you'll join us. John Vandenberg (chat) 10:48, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi John. Thanks for the invite.
I certainly won't be able to attend the live meetup in Sydney.
As for other involvement, this form of intensive collaboration doesn't really suit me. I do spend an inordinately high proportion of my free time here anyway, and in a sense I'm always engaged in my own edit-a-thon. I will be listening to the ABC broadcasts with interest, and checking out relevant articles along the way, and making whatever improvements I think are called for. In that sense I'll be with you, and in more than just spirit, but as for any formal involvement in the exercise, best to count me out.
I love being part of this grand collaboration called Wikipedia, but I work best when left alone to my own devices. If that makes any sense at all.
Cheers, and bon chance! -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 04:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


Hello, JackofOz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dialing Queen?

Were you trying for the non sequitur, or did you just happen to edit the wrong section? - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language&diff=516127102&oldid=516125089 -- 71.35.101.136 (talk) 23:12, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

It was one of my better ultimoverbalist non sequiturs. Until now. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 23:41, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nikki Gemmell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darwin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, JackofOz. You have new messages at Jim1138's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, JackofOz. You have new messages at Jim1138's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Townsend (RAF officer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DFC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Alexander Taneyev talk page

Jack, just to let you know that I've revised my comment on "Alexandr" (because I couldn't replicate my Google figures), but am feeling guilty that it's probably not the best of form to edit a comment that has been followed up. I don't think my edit has materially altered what I had to say in version 1, though -- and, by the way, I agree 100% with your own comment! -- Picapica (talk) 15:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Blanking JG Talk

Um, did you really mean to do this? --Pete (talk) 00:49, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

No, of course not, Pete. I can't even understand how that could possibly have happened, because I was editing the last thread only, not the entire page. I put it down to some software glitch that got even more frustrated with the edit conflicts than I was getting.
I've fixed it now. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 00:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Totally understood. Sometimes odd things happen. I think we could productively lose the final section. Fun to speculate, but without a skerrick of evidence it doesn't belong in a BLP. --Pete (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
It was one step up from "She's a stupid lying bitch" or similar. It was at least an assertion of something that, if true, would be of immense interest to a large number of people. Except, it ain't true. I'd keep it, hatted, for the record, and to have something to refer back to when the next such claim is made. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 01:13, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Lenox Hewitt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to BHP, St Kilda and Commonwealth Club
John Farrow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Cocoanut Grove
Pierre Monteux (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dieppe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Knight titles

Hi there. I remember, a long while back, you raising issues with the names of Bob Cotton and Ken Anderson (Australian politician). In my reading lately I've been encountering this problem anew with these and many other Australians who were knighted - references to them prior to knighthood are almost invariably Bob or Ken, but then they become Sir Robert and Sir Kenneth. I've raised the issue here and would appreciate your input, as I'm genuinely torn on this one. Frickeg (talk) 10:55, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Jacques Barzun at ITN

I have nominated the article for the recent deaths ticker at ITN. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Intellectual_Jacques_Barzun_dies_at_104 You may want to add yourself as an updater. μηδείς (talk) 16:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not really disposed to involve myself in that activity, but thanks anyway. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 23:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Ref Desk

I'm sorry I didn't hat your post, or take it to the "talk." I figured you would be big enough to see that your response was a total non-response, that you were not assuming good faith, and that its absence in no material way harmed either the Ref Desk or your own personal reputation. It seemed like taking it to a talk page would be giving the whole thing more attention than it was worth, and we all know that hatting draws more attention to the hatted comment than just removing it. I'm sorry if it offended you, but I still stand by the fact that your comment was unduly biting of an OP.

I have no idea what kind of homework you think they were doing, to be honest — as my answer to them indicated, I think they were somewhat confused, and that if there is a "homework answer" there, I didn't see it.

Their IP address directs to Mexico; I think that makes for a fair assumption that English might not be their native language.

I guess my question to you is, what did your answer really add to the Ref Desk? Neither I (nor probably you) really believe that answers are holy in and of themselves, and deserve to be there just because someone wrote them.

If your response was important to you, open up a thread about it at the Ref Desk talk. I don't remove things arbitrarily. If the first responder has said something pointless or flip, I'll sometimes remove it because I don't want to discourage the OP and I don't want to get into a long meta-discussion about whether pointless and flip responses should be removed or kept or whatever.

My goal here is just making the whole place a better one. I'm not trying to be a cop or anything — just another participant. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I take all that in the positive spirit in which you wrote it. Except for the crack about my bigness. This has nothing to do with my personal reputation, and the removal of other editors' posts can never be justified by saying the removal did no harm.
The Ref Desk is not like an article that gets polished and edited by successive editors, and changes its form many times along the way. It's much more like a conversation, warts and all, which has a temporal linearity. Ideally, its history is permanently on display; with articles, you have to do some digging to discover who said what when. Sometimes in RL people say things that they later regret, and it's within their prerogative to withdraw and apologise, if they think that's appropriate. In the ref desk context, they can even go one step further than they can go in RL, and make it seem as if the offending words were never uttered in the first place. They do this by editing the page to remove those words. It's not permanently expunged from the record, because older versions of the page will show the words having been posted, and later having been removed. But for the current page, it's as if the words were never uttered at all. The editor who wrote the words has that option of removing or altering their own words. We can all do this, in respect of our own words. But the rule is that we do not edit others' words in any way, and that extends to wholesale removal of them, unless in the most extreme cases or as otherwise sanctioned by our rules, policies and guidelines.
I had an off-wiki conversation about this very issue with User:Bielle recently, which started when I made what I considered a very minor change to a third party editor's post (I've lost the details now but I think I just added a link to make it clear what they were talking about). Bielle's view, and I hope she won't mind me quoting her words here, was:
  • As long as you are prepared to take the heat for your personal "special cases", then I guess it is your call. As you may have worked out already, I am of the group that acknowledges no special cases -hands off something that is signed is an absolute for me, so I won't likely be supporting you.
Bielle expressed very well what I think is the general consensus on this matter, and one that I adhere to despite my little brain failure and flippant claiming of a special case.
The question then becomes: "How do we deal with posts that bother us, but in a way that gives them as little unwarranted attention as possible?". As you say, the regular options (hatting; discussing in situ; discussing on the talk page) all seem to fail the last criterion. I acknowledge the difficulty that posed for you, and I have no ready-made solution to offer. Striking it out or reducing the size, unless done by the original editor, would have been equally inappropriate. All I will say is that to remove the post from your eyes, and from everyone else's eyes including my own, was not the right thing to do. To do so without even informing me (because you cannot depend on every editor reading every, or even any, edit summary), was another thing that was not right to do.
You say it was unduly bitey: it didn't feel that way to me, but I can see how it might have appeared that way to you. The thing is, we don't deal with issues by pretending they never happened, but that's pretty much what I see you doing here. And now, many more words have been spent on something you wanted to attract no attention at all. Ironic, huh? That which we resist, persists.
I won't be restoring my post, because it's not of such moment as to warrant restoration, but that's beside the point at issue here.
I'd like you to agree here and now that:
  • (a) removal of other editors' posts is almost always inappropriate, and
  • (b) whatever very small class of exceptions there may be to that general rule, my post was not a member of it.
If you can't or won't agree to both of those, we can have a back-room conversation with our colleagues about it, because it raises an important issue of principle. As I say, my actual post had very little intrinsic merit and I'm not arguing this point for the sake of my post alone. But neither did it have the level of offence you attribute to it. And even if it did, the solution chosen was not only not helpful but actually negative, because it creates more problems than it seeks to solve.
Cheers. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 00:02, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Jack let me know he had quoted me here. I have developed my practice of not removing someone's signed post (question or answer), save in the most egregious circumstances (and I don't think I have come across a signed one that needed to be "emergency deleted" by my standards) over time. If I really feel strongly about something someone has written, I will usually go to their talk page and ask them to reconsider. Usually they do, though not in this case, for example. The current question read to me like a Google translation, but I didn't check the location. I intended just to leave it as I had no idea what they were asking. Jack's response, somewhat informally posed, echoed my bewilderment, but I wouldn't have written it that way, only because I thought there might be a problem with language competence. Mr 98's response, on the other hand, is as incomprehensible to me as the initial question; I have no idea what either party is talking about, and so I would leave them to profit from each other as best they might. My $C0.02 Bielle (talk) 01:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

barbarism

Please pay attention to what I said, Jack. Barbarism is the phenomenon of non-standard pronunciation among other things. See barbarism (linguistics). My comment was on point and civil and had nothing to do with calling Australians or Americans with non-standard vowels barbarians. But you took it to that level with your response that had nothing to do with speech. Clemenceau was a creep. I did my junior thesis on him. He was responsible for the death of a lot of Americans in WWI, (as was Wilson), and his cynical actions at Versaille, purposefully meant to cripple Germany, lead directly to WWII. That's a side topic and can be hatted. But your opinion of my perfectly relevant comment to HiLo is just that, your opinion, and not cause for hatting that comment. I am restoring my comment. If you want to ask for clarification on that thread what I meant by barabarism, do so and I will answer. μηδείς (talk) 20:24, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

The thread was about the expressions "second-to-last" and "second(-)last". I made the point that the latter is the only version in standard use in Australia. HiLo48 confirmed this. In passing, he made the point "This must be one of those rare times when Australian English differs from both British AND American English". That didn't suddenly become the topic of the thread, and hence no further examples were called for. That is why your comment was irrelevant.
But if HiLo's remark had become the legitimate topic of the thread, there would be a very long list of ways in which AusEng differs from both BrEng and AmEng. You chose one specific and, yes, gratuitous example. To quote a well-known but nameless denizen of these parts: "You saw an opening and you went for it". I am fully aware of what barbarism means in a linguistic context and did not need you to educate me. But you are obviously speaking from an other-than-Australian perspective, because however we normally speak here in Australia is by definition standard in our own terms. There is no one world standard of English with which all regional varieties are to be compared. Americans don't like being told their way of speaking or doing anything has to be measured against some arbitrarily dreamt up and arbitrarily imposed external "standard". Guess what: neither do Australians. You also pointedly chose to contrast a mention of barbarism with a mention of quality. The implication being that Australian vowels lack said quality. The whole remark was littered with layers of unspoken but still existent meaning, and it was obnoxious and xenophobic. Deny it all day if you like, but I won't believe you.
You've got some hide to come here demanding I pay attention to what you have to say. You have left in your wake a litany of unresolved issues and unacknowledged errors and unanswered questions. The latest unanswered question from me was this from 17 days ago. Admittedly, it was posted after you'd taken the coward's way of quitting the scene but only after attacking me most unnecessarily and most unjustly. Honourable behaviour? Hmmm. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 22:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
I am not demanding, I am explaining, since you seem to have taken the word askance, given your response quoting someone calling Americans barbarians. My response to HiLo did not have anything to do with people being barbarians. If you want to ask me to edit that word out of respect for you please ask me. But the comment itself is appropriate. μηδείς (talk) 00:33, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I never said that you claimed Australians themselves are barbarians. This was all about our way of speaking, specifically our vowels. Why you're suddenly suggesting it was ever about anything else ... I charitably ascribe it to more of that Sandy anxiety. If you're picking up on my mention of xenophobia, that does not have to refer to a people in themselves; it can refer to any aspect of them, including their speech.
My irrelevancy (the Clemenceau quote) was in response to your irrelevancy (the quality of Australian vowels), and mine deserved to be hatted along with yours. But not alone. Never alone.
I have explained in detail why your comment wasn't appropriate. Merely asserting the contrary is no sort of response. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 00:55, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
If you want to ask me to clarify my use of barbaric, please let me know. I will be happy to do so out of respect for you. It was not used 'caustically' as you said in your edit summary and ("You seem to be in a particularly caustic mood lately") when you hatted the remark. Obviously I was angry at the Clemenceau remark, and have no problem with that being hatted, but I did not attack you or Australians in response. PS, the junior thesis was on the Versaille Treaty, occasioned by the death of three of my uncles in WWI, not on Clemenceau directly. μηδείς (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
You assert that you have respect for me, yet your actions do not match that. To wit:
  • I have said that I fully understand what barbarism (linguistics) means
  • I have even explicitly denied that I ever thought you were describing Australians as barbarians
- but you once again offer to clarify your use of barbaric. Huh? Do so if you must, but please also explain why it would override the point below, viz. ...
  • I have offered you the opportunity to demonstrate to me (not just assert) why your comment was even relevant to the topic of second-(to)-last
- but your response is to once again ignore me. So much for respect.
Let me say it again. It does not matter what you meant the barbaric reference to mean, because it was not relevant. Please don't come back here unless you have something of substance to say about this issue of relevance. I'm not interested in your linguistic camouflages and avoidance of issues. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 04:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Australia–United States relations (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Statute of Westminster
Carnaval (Schumann) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Jean-Paul

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

well said

It's good to see a liberal who doesn't accept the woe-is-me attitude. And I have long wondered whom to blame Thai food and Sushi on. μηδείς (talk) 01:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I know you meant "liberal" in the broadest possible sense. It's used in Australia in a particular partisan sense. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 04:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
We have the same kind of partisan liberal in Canada and then there is the parallel partisan conservative. So, we talk of "big C" and "small c" conservatives, and "big L" and "small l" liberals. We know what we mean - usually. Bielle (talk) 02:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Us too, Bielle. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 02:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
i assumed I would be understood with the lower case usage. I'd've been a Liberal back when G. K. Chesterton was. μηδείς (talk) 02:36, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
I never quite know where you're at with caps (e.g. Bill clinton and the rise of Fox television in the uS are much more '90's than GHWB). -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 04:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, those didn't seem to cause confusion, so weren't worth correcting when I noticed them. Be assured I used liberal and Liberal on purpose. μηδείς (talk) 04:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Cheers. My base-line assumption was always that people who've studied language and linguistics in greater depth than I have, would be at least as particular as I am when it comes to spelling, capitalisation, punctuation, word choice and similar things. I'm slowly learning that this is not necessarily the case. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 05:02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs

Thank you for your recent articles, including Michael Bialoguski, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:07, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


Thanks, Piotr. I'm aware of DYK, and have had a fair few, the last one in June - see here.
One reason I've not been active in DYK since then is the rule that an editor has to earn the right to self-nominate, by first reviewing a certain number of other editors' nominations. But that rule seems to be no longer in place. Am I right in saying it's no longer a rule? -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 02:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Symphony in D (Voříšek) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to New Philharmonia Orchestra and Czech
František Neumann (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Carlsruhe
Michael Bialoguski (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to New Philharmonia Orchestra
Yuri Fayer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Coppelia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

nijinsky

Sorry, dont see how this para was repetitious? [[4]] Sandpiper (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. This was the previous version. Read the section Marriage, and tell me if you don’t think paragraphs 5 and 8, which both start "On returning to Paris ...", are repetitious. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 20:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
yes, got it, accidentally added it twice. But the copy at the end was in the right place and the one in the middle wrong. Got confused because you deleted the bit at the end which was where it ought to go. Fixed now. Sandpiper (talk) 21:34, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Beethoven/Liszt

Hello,

In case the e-mail I sent you got sidetracked somehow, I wanted to repeat my message to you here.

When I looked at your User Page, I noticed that you are a pianist, and I wanted to share this with you. I wanted to let you know (if you already didn't) that the company, Harmonia Mundi (France), issued a 7CD set of the complete symphonies of Beethoven as transcribed for piano by Franz Liszt. Extraordinary! I especially like the Pastorale played by Michel Dalberto. It is the 5th disk in the collection, and its disc number is HMX-2901196. In fact, I have it playing right now as I write this. Enjoy! -- Michael David (talk) 20:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Michael. I did get your email and planned to respond, but I was sidetracked yesterday (Monday) with hordes of evil-doers brutally reminding me that I had suddenly come one step closer to the grave. :)
I don't know that particular set, but I certainly know the Beethoven-Liszt transcriptions and have recordings of some of them. I think Glenn Gould was the first pianist to record any of them (the 5th), and I still have that LP from the early 70s. Who are the other pianists on the HM set? Cheers. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 20:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Paul Badura-Skoda, Jean-Louis Haguenauer, Georges Plaudermacher, Alain Planes, Jean-Claude Pennetier - Michael David (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Cool. I know Badura-Skoda. Georges Pludermacher has been on my to-do list for a while. The other three are not names I know. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 21:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Badura-Skoda plays the 5th Symphony (with an added bonus of Schubert's Sonata #19); and a duo of Pludermacher & Planès tackle the 9th (wonderfully!). Enjoy! - Michael David (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
If it's Liszt transcriptions and arrangements you're interested in, you might like to check out Franz Liszt's treatments of the works of other composers, which has the full details, as far as I can tell. I'm sure there are gaps, but I hope they're minor. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 22:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

WoO/op or Op

Hi Jack - you may want to check your rationale re the Mendelssohn Songs w/out words -

'WoO (Beethoven)' is abbreviation for (German) Werke ohne Opuszahl - hence the caps because of German words. It's the accepted international acronym for this catalogue
'opus' is a Latin, lower-case, word. Although the WP article Opus number gives it (almost) consistently with a capital letter, it gives no reason for this, and indeed the sources it cites (OED, American Heritage dictionary) clearly give lower case. Lower-case usage seems consistent in Grove, etc.

So it seems to me that Opus number needs editing, and that 'op.' should be established as norm in Wikipedia.....Best, --Smerus (talk) 12:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) WP:OPUS and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music#Abbreviations are quite unambiguous about the upper case usage for Opus; This was the result of several discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Guidelines/Archive 1. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Aha! Thanks - --Smerus (talk) 14:54, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Alexander Archdale (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Skippy, House of Darkness, Ritz Theatre and Embassy Theatre
Inessa Galante (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vladimir Vavilov
John Dee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Council of Nicaea
Nigel Westlake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to ABC Radio

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

carv vine

good to see youre doing something there - he tends to think he can do his own article ...:) SatuSuro 05:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

phonecall joke

I don't find the homo lover joke offensive--just terribly unclear, and hence unfunny. Who's supposed to be the lover? The answering policeman? Is the policeman supposed to accuse the caller of being the dead man's gay lover? Needs work. μηδείς (talk) 21:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

It was a play on Baseball Bugs' mispelling of homicide as "homocide". Clearer now? -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 21:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I guess that is funny now (I just laughed) but I fear most people will miss it. μηδείς (talk) 22:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Their loss. But I long ago dropped the need for people to always get my "humour". I'm sure you can relate to this. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 22:06, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Orry Kelly

Dear Jack, Greetings. I'm a Sydney based screenwriter, writing a documentary on Orry Kelly. I've hit an absolute brick wall searching for a relative of Orry's whom I understand has OK's unpublished autobiography. The relative's name is/was Ephraim Manasseh and was great nephew to Orry Kelly via his mother Corrie Manasseh. I'm writing to you because you've done an entry on OK for Wikipedia and I wondered if Mr Manasseh had ever been in touch with you. Yes, I'm drawing a long bow here but as I said I'm getting very frustrated as it would be a great asset to understanding Orry Kelly. Any clues greatly appreciated. My email is katherine@katherinethomson.com

Very best and thanks in advance, Katherine Thomson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.194.166 (talk) 07:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Katherine.
Long bows sometimes bear fruit, but not in this case, unfortunately. I'd never even heard of Ephraim Manasseh before now. Sorry I can't be of any further help. Best of luck with the doco.
I guess most people would draw a total blank at the mention of Orry-Kelly these days, not realising that he won more Oscars (3) than any other Australian, a record still waiting to be broken. But I remember seeing his name on movie credits in the 1960s, even the late '50s. Back then, I had no idea he was an Australian. He was not a household name in the way that Errol Flynn or Merle Oberon or even Cecil Kellaway were. Isn't it weird that we were very prepared to accept as Australians people who actually weren't (Oberon's Tasmanian-origin story has been debunked; and Kellaway was a ring-in from South Africa although he did at least live here for many years), but someone who was actually from here, and did three times better than Finch, Rush, Crowe, Blanchett or Ledger at the Oscars, is virtually totally forgotten. Not by Wikipedia, though. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 08:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for update

Hi JackofOz,

Many thanks for updating the page on Philip Ledger - much appreciated. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:48, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. That's what editors are for.  :) -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 18:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination!

A Tshirt!
I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project.
I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

Joefromrandb (talk) 04:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Wow and wow again! What a lovely surprise, Joe (may I call you Joe?). I had no idea Wikipedia did this stuff.
Thank you for nominating me for this. Best news I've had all week. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 05:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
You're quite welcome Jack! You deserve it! And of course you may call me Joe; it's one of the nicer names I've been called on Wikipedia! Joefromrandb (talk) 05:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: Damned good thrashing

Thanks for your comments - I look forward to some blood-curdling threats. You're right - parents DID used to threaten all kinds of grievous bodily harm, and children were never entirely sure if they were being serious or not. Alansplodge (talk) 14:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Time for your medicine

Cough syrup

Left untreated, symptoms like this can lead to an alarming disorder wherein conformity to wiki norms is challenged in favor of common sense and good typographic practice. And then where would we be? Rivertorch (talk) 15:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

(smile). -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 07:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Brady

Just read the article. Very interesting. If a zillion forgettable pop-stars can have articles, why not Stephen? And being the world's first gay-ambo-couple surely counts (tho he's not the absolute first - the path had been blazed before he arrived). His gay creds are, however, a bit shaky, or at least the bit that says he was always "openly" gay. He was not! 'Twas a deep dark secret! He also put the kybosh on another gay about to be appointed Oz Rep (not ambo) to the Vatican - true, the person in question was a bit of a joke, but still, young Stephen wasn't very nice about it. Maybe I should write his biography... 180.200.144.99 (talk) 09:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

The sources we have say that Brady and Stephens were the world's first same-sex ambassadorial couple. If you know differently, can you point me in the direction of a source that confirms it?
We don't say he was "always" openly gay. We say: In February 1999 he made headlines as Australia's and the world's first openly gay ambassador when he formally presented his partner Peter Stephens to Queen Margrethe II of Denmark. Whether he was out or not prior to this is not something we make any comment about.
Thanks. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 09:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
They were the first to be officially recognised in the country of accreditation - when an ambassador is appointed, the name of his/her accompanying spouse is conveyed to the receiving country so that diplomatic status can be extended to that person. Gay ambassadors have been appointed before, but this was the first time that a same-sex spouse had been recognised and accorded diplomatic status.
The point about his openness is that he seems to have come to it rather slowly. PiCo (talk) 14:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Slowly by whose timetable? Who gets to decide when and how, or even whether, a gay person should come out, apart from the person themself? I'm not remotely interested in pursuing the anonymous scuttlebutt referred to above, but if you have some well sourced new material of relevance to our article, please provide it. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 19:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JackofOz/Archive_22&oldid=1190245666"