User talk:Katalogo Kochela

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

The user will watch his user page for the sole purpose of seeing whether anyone solves the cryptographic challenge left there.

Welcome!

Hello, Katalogo Kochela, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Welcome

Good to see more editors interested in classical music. Let me know if you need anything. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers if you are interested in seeing what other editors are discussing. Cheers. DavidRF (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Glad to be welcomed by you. Katalogo Kochela (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discographies

Hello. We usually steer clear of discographies in WP:CM as many of the works in the core repertoire have been recorded hundreds of times. Checking you've found some of the rare instances of these pages, though (i.e Symphony No. 7 (Sibelius) discography) as you can see the page needed to be forked off from the composition article or it would have overwhelmed it. I think some operas have discography articles as well, but Category:Classical music discographies is mainly performers and conductors.

As for what is happening at Symphony No. 30 (Haydn), I don't see why Eusebeus is being so draconian about things. As great as this work is, its only been recorded a handful of times, so the section is in no danger of getting any larger than it already is. I can think of two issues here. First, I'm pretty sure he thinks one of the editors is part of a sock-puppet farm that was shut down last fall. (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music/Archive_13#Sock_Farm_shut_down). Second, I get the impression that he's worried we'll look like a place to advertise. Still, he doesn't think enough before he reverts. My advice here is to focus on the performance practice and not on record labels, couplings and "LP's". What's most interesting with this particular work is the presence or absence of the reconstructed trumpet and timpani parts. A couple of sentences linking research into their authenticity with their presence in recordings could be place up higher in the article right after the instrumentation is listed. Cheers. DavidRF (talk) 15:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the farm was unfortunate. Its certainly an unacceptable way to get a consensus (if you want to be permanently banned from wikipedia, set up a sock farm). Its rare, though, and relatively easy for moderators to spot once they become suspicious and know to look. I'm just giving you a heads up as to part of the reason why Eusebeus is doing reverts without any discussion. DavidRF (talk) 16:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Sorry. By no means do I intend to scare you away! Just giving you a heads up so you don't get overly frustrating with one particular issue on one small group of articles. You seem to be knowledgeable and have access to references. Plenty of enjoyable stuff to do under the radar so to speak. Don't worry too much. DavidRF (talk) 18:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The worry was justified. Some of the worst predictions from wikitruth and Wikipedia Review came true, fulfilled by Eusebeus. David was nice, though. Katalogo Kochela (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]