User talk:Kleinzach/Archive 32

Archive 25

←

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Angela Gheorghiu discography

Hi. Yes, I have the catalogue numbers for most of the cds and dvds. I'll add them. You've done a very good job with the discography! Madamabutterfly (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

That's great. Thanks. --Kleinzach 23:27, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Overlinking

Regarding the amount of linking in the list of operas by Auber, and elsewhere, where the editor in the edit summary referred to WP:REPEATLINK: that guideline has two parts: a) don't repeat, b) except in three cases, one of them relating to tables. So, the editor has a valid point.

I'm in two minds: a page dense with blue links looks weird (as does a page drowning in red), but it must be diffcult for a reader to find a clickable link after sorting a table. Take Auber: after sorting by librettist, the clickable link for the genre "opéra comique" of the work in the first row, Le séjour militaire, is five rows down; after sorting by "Theatre", the second row is Lestocq, ou L'intrigue et l'amour and the link for its librettist, Scribe, is almost two screens down. – Food for thought. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

We had a discussion about this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking) and a new wording was agreed to reflect actual practice by editors. Did you see that? It was agreed that links that appear in main (body) text would be repeated again in tables/lists, but not an indefinite number of times. Just common sense really. The List of operas by Auber had about 30 links to Scribe. I don't see how anyone could justify such obvious overlinking. (Re your examples, having occasional extra links in either long text or tables/lists is fine IMO.)--Kleinzach 13:18, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Eh, no, I didn't see that, and my unaided reading of the reworded third point at WP:REPEATLINK didn't convey the altered meaning to me. But then again, I knew the previous wording and, not having read the discussion and no traffic sign "Changed Conditions Ahead", I failed to pick it up. At least our past practice is now validated. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

French street addresses

Hi KZ: I notice that some French street addresses in your list of theatres have a comma, as in "11, rue Général Blaise", and some don't, as in "110 rue Amelot". The same is true of the articles themselves. Is this something we should worry about? Picky picky picky.--Foobarnix (talk) 02:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I've just put commas in all the addresses. It seems with comma is commoner than without. I suppose we should try to be consistent even if the French aren't! --Kleinzach 03:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I Just fixed a couple theatre street addresses on your List and noticed an anomaly. See the two websites Le Trabendo and Théâtre Paris-Villette. They are at the same address. Can that be right?--Foobarnix (talk) 22:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, looking at Google Maps they are about 300 or 400 metres apart. --Kleinzach 01:01, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Théâtre de l'Atelier

Hi K: Do you have a watch on my talk page? There are some remarks for you there regarding List of theatres and entertainment venues in Paris.

Here is a new theatre for you: Théâtre de l'Atelier. I am still cleaning up the French translation. What is in the article so far is correct, I think, but it still needs work. Please have at it! I will watch for further discussion of this new article here.--Foobarnix (talk) 01:47, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Excellent! I'll comment on your talk about the list. --Kleinzach 02:17, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Here is another new article: Théâtre Montparnasse--Foobarnix (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Good. Looks article-worthy. --Kleinzach 03:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I have created two more theatre articles: Théâtre national de la Colline and Café de la Gare. Café de la Gare is a particularly interesting case—but I wish I had better citations to support the facts of its history. Also, a little bit unsure about long/latitude.--Foobarnix (talk) 01:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

That's great. Please feel free to add data to the List of theatres and entertainment venues in Paris — there's a lot missing! --Kleinzach 03:01, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Another new theatre, La Cigale, and a new French actress, Sotha.--Foobarnix (talk) 09:01, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks excellent. Very good. --Kleinzach 03:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

FSC

Have you stopped watching WP:FSC? I know you have a lot of knowledge and we need reviewers.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Title of the Paris Opera article

Hi Kleinzach, I have left some more discussion for you concerning the title of Paris Opera at Talk:Paris Opera#Rename (Paris Opera or Paris Opéra?) --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Renaissance and Baroque Society of Pittsburgh

Just for the record, my prod was not based upon their being a non-notable musical group, but their apparently being a non-notable group period. I understood the prose just fine. :) (I did list it on the music deletion sorting page, but you'll notice that was not the musician and band page - that distinction was chosen with care.) LadyofShalott 09:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

It might be be better to take it to Afd. The article needs referencing to establish notability. --Kleinzach 09:39, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I shall. After doing a Google search to try to find references to add, I prodded it. Since you've challenged that, I will take it to AfD... but when I'm on another machine where I can make better use of Twinkle to do it easily. LadyofShalott 09:44, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I won't necessarily oppose the Afd. It depends on what people can turn up on the subject. --Kleinzach 09:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renaissance and Baroque Society of Pittsburgh now exists. If anyone can show the existence of appropriate references, I'll happily withdraw the nomination. LadyofShalott 16:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Jono: The Musical

You mentioned on the Jono: The Musical talk page that it could be resubmitted if there were noteable sources. Today we were on the front page of The Kentish Express, Tenterden. Would it be possible to re submit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.putland (talk • contribs) 19:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Unfortunately a local newspaper might not qualify here on WP a 'notable source' but you can ask other people for their opinions. Regards. --Kleinzach 23:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Alexanderwolfe Wiki Page

Hi Kleinzach
This is with regard to your comment on deleting the Alexanderwolfe wiki page. I am Alex's manager and we created this page together taking information and photos only from his approved source. Could you please tell me why this page has been considered for deletion. I have added in some references today along with links to provide proof of him as a releasing recording artist, and not of questionable notability. Please could you let me know what you feel should be added to support this page not being deleted. Thanks. Bang Management Alexanderwolfe (talk) 10:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, please write here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Alexanderwolfe. --Kleinzach 10:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you/Lawrentia

Thank you. I received your letter. Thank you for the invitation. But my English is not perfect and I need help. But I try. --Lawrentia (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. Are you Russian? Keep up the good work on the artist biographies. Best regards. --Kleinzach 00:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, I am Russian! --Lawrentia (talk) 02:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

MfD WP AoE

Re your comments at WT:VG#Mfd Wikipedia:WikiProject Age of Empires, I'd just like you to note the existence of WP:VG/IPC, just so you have something to reference when you find a VG related WP MFD/see one closed. Cheers. --Izno (talk) 04:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for sorting this out — and giving me the useful reference. Best. --Kleinzach 00:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Your message/ Mfd on WikiProject Music of the United Kingdom

Hi Kleinzach! You are a tireless worker in an ungrateful universe! Keep it up. Thanks for the message anent the United Kingdom. I have left a reply. I agree with you that the title of the project is no good. It isn't a question of whether the UK is a good or a bad institution. It's about using the right terms. The hope was to provide a categorization or set of pathways so that Interested readers could navigate around the articles on related subjects. That of course led to the thorny question - What are we really talking about? Well we thought that we knew, but Heaven only knows!!! Every good wish, Eebahgum (talk) 12:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I have now said everything I intend to on that page (and rather wish I had never heard of it!) - I have never been a joiner of Projects anyway, so the outcome is unlikely to affect me either way. Good luck in your editing, cheers Eebahgum (talk) 09:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I've just managed to catch up with the discussion! I'm amazed how long it's become. I generally agree with your points, though the length of the discussion makes me think that national music projects, as opposed to genre-based ones, are really not very productive. It may be possible to combine England, Wales and Scotland, but I doubt if it is possible to join pop, classical and folk. Thank you for your kind words above. Best regards. --Kleinzach 00:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

And thanks to you also. I wish I had not been obliged to exonerate myself at such length. I am sure a workable formula will emerge, and the less it has to do with nationalism of any kind or shape the happier I shall be! That way madness lies, and it has nothing whatever to do with the sacred fire of music. Eebahgum (talk) 06:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

As you may realize, one of the main contributors to that discussion has a lengthy record of edit warring/blocks on UK/British subjects. --Kleinzach 03:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm - in any case, whatever project now emerges will need to be shaped and developed by musical intelligence, or else it will again be ignored. These questions of where music is from or about, or where performed, and similarly of the composers and performers themselves, are really questions outside music, or apart from it: and each person has a different view of what such identifications mean. Will you be listing Charles Villiers Stanford as 'British' or 'Irish' or 'UK' - ? My friend amusingly suggests we should have a Wikiproject for 'Music of the Home Counties'. Eebahgum (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I think I would list Charles Villiers Stanford as a composer. In fact the Composers Project has looked after biographies rather well . . . --Kleinzach 10:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the composers are well served. Thanks also for your message about the redirection, and the closure of the previous Mfd page. Please forgive me if I stay right out of it this time! - But your recommendation seems quite apropos. Good luck with it and thanks for your wisdom and support. Eebahgum (talk) 09:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Théâtre Verlaine

Hi Kleinzach -- I have been doing mathematicians and lawyers lately. I am momentarily back at the theatre. There was a 1957 production of Feu! by the French writer d'Yves Chatelain, directed by Paul Abram at the Theatre des Arts (Paris) which the French Wikipedia redirects to Théâtre Verlaine. Apparently this theatre no longer exists. Should it be included in List of demolished entertainment venues in Paris? You can see the reference I am talking about at José Noguero --Foobarnix (talk) 22:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back. I'm not familiar with the Théâtre Verlaine at all. Maybe it does belongs in the List of demolished entertainment venues in Paris, but so far I have done any work on that page. It certainly needs some attention, also renaming I think to List of former and demolished entertainment venues in Paris (or similar) as some former theatres were converted rather than knocked down. What do you think? --Kleinzach 15:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I completely agree that the name needs to be changed. However, I suggest the name List of former or demolished entertainment venues in Paris. See And/or for my reason.

I am beginning the page Théâtre Verlaine. I should be done in a day or so. It turns out that it is a former theater, although I do not know if it has been demolished. — Foobarnix (talk) 00:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

OK. I have moved the page to List of former or demolished entertainment venues in Paris and I've done a bit of work on it. Obviously much more is needed. As with the other list I think we need to concentrate on buildings (indicated by addresses) rather than companies, or indeed theatre names. (This may mean more than one entry with the same name – differentiated by the addresses.) --Kleinzach 03:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

H Kleinzach: Good job. If you have the patience and resources to sort through the ever-shifting names and locations of present and former French theatres, you have my complete admiration. The whole subject makes my head hurt. However, I do want to help. If you want to identify some of the red links on former theatres and on present theatres most in need of attention, I would be glad to start pages on them—either from scratch or by bringing over translated pages from the French Wikipedia, as appropriate. I do this anyway, but I thought you might have a better idea of what venues are most in need of coverage. — Foobarnix (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

You might start with Alhambra-Maurice Chevalier [[1]. (There is quite a lot of material.) I think it's much faster and easier to use the French Wiki articles. Another possibility: the Théâtre des Gobelins [2]. Good luck! --Kleinzach 00:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Folies-Nouvelles

Folies-Nouvelles is on the page List of demolished entertainment venues in Paris. Folies-Nouvelles redirects to Théâtre Déjazet which is in the Category:Theatres in Paris. Evidently Théâtre Déjazet still exists. Any way to clear up the confusion? (Those damn peripatetic French!) — Foobarnix (talk) 00:50, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I thought it was easier just to remove this. --Kleinzach 03:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

French theatre 1940-1944

Hi Kleinzach — I ran across this rather interesting PDF file. I think it has some interesting historical details about WWII era French theatre. It is a thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham. Is it worth taking a look at? THE PARISIAN STAGE DURING THE OCCUPATION — Foobarnix (talk) 02:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, looks interesting. --Kleinzach 05:31, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

References sections in Clasical Music and Opera articles

Greetings from Santa Fe. Thanks for your note in reference to the CM page.

I like the look of what's there, especially putting "Online source" in its own section, which I assume means something different from "External links" found on WPO. Maybe we should adopt our format slightly.

In working on the revisions, I've sometimes found it very time-consuming to actually cross-check from the "Notes" to see if the sources below are the cited ones, but that can come in time. I'm trying to get major composers changed first.

Interestingly, setting up this format often reveals a severe lack of detailed sources when only the footnotes appear. Viva-Verdi (talk) 03:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes agreed. I think it's useful to distinguish between 'online source' and 'external ink'. I found it tricky giving the example, that's why I ended up putting it in a box. Anyway please comment on the proposal as you like. Best. --Kleinzach 03:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Alhambra-Maurice Chevalier and the new Alhambra theatre

Hi Kleinzach—I have been working on this article in my personal workspace. It is quite challanging. The French Wikipedia article seems to conflate two separate venues:

• The Alhambra, aka Alhambra-Maurice Chevalier, a music hall located at 50, rue de Malte in the 11th arrondissement of Paris. It opened on August 11, 1866 and was finally demolished in 1967.
• The New Alhambra opened in April of 2008 at 21, rue Yves-Toudic in the 10th arrondissement, 300 meters from the old Alhambra Maurice Chevalier (rue Yves-Toudic is actually turns into rue de Malte).

I am thinking of breaking this into two articles

• Alhambra-Maurice Chevalier which has a long history, is a former theatre, and is most of the French article.
• The Alhambra, a current theatre with a website, open only 3 years; it will be a shorter article (see The new Alhambra) and may take a little research. Perhaps this article can refer to the other Alhambra as a model or inspiration or something.

What strategy do you recommend?—Foobarnix (talk) 15:09, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely, absolutely, two separate articles will be much better, I think. The second (new) theatre is reviving the name, but that's probably all. It also apparently has a history going back to 1920. (We obviously need to cover it in a second article to avoid confusion about the name.) --Kleinzach 00:17, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Alhambra (Paris) is done. Feel free to revise my work at any time. I feel better if other people check it. The Alhambra-Maurice Chevalier is going to take a bit of doing (you can follow developements here).—Foobarnix (talk) 21:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. I've done a quick edit. Will try to look at it again. --Kleinzach 02:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:List of operettas by Offenbach#Compositions by Offenbach

Hi. It looks as if you've been away but are now back. I seem to recall that you're no longer watching the Opera Project, but you might be interested in the above discussion (and perhaps also in contributing to its continuation at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera#Offenbach_-_copied_from_composer_talk_page) as you've been heavily involved in creating most of the lists. (also, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera#Changes to referencing guidelines, a couple of threads above, in which you were also involved). Hope all is well! Best. --GuillaumeTell 21:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about this. I have been away - and still very busy offline. . . . --Kleinzach 06:30, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Tales of Hoffmann - masterpiece/'puff word'

To Tim riley: Re List of compositions by Jacques Offenbach, the intro now states "Offenbach is principally known for his operettas, of which he composed 98 between 1847 and 1880. He also wrote two opéras, Die Rheinnixen and his unfinished Les contes d'Hoffmann." whereas he is actually known for the operettas and Hoffmann. (Hoffmann is probably his best known and most performed work.) I used the word 'masterpiece' to try to redress the balance. The usage is unoriginal, see here, but perhaps you'd like to have a go at rewording it? --Kleinzach 01:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I shall be mightily surprised if at least one of the published authorities does not so describe the work. I ought to have thought to check before pruning. Shall check tomorrow and restore if, as I expect, I find citations. Tim riley (talk) 16:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hoffmann is always said to be his masterpiece. Has been for decades. If not Hoffmann, what? La Vie Parisienne? Hardly. Varlaam (talk) 05:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Arthur Elson, A Critical History of Opera, published in 1901, does not mention Hoffmann or Offenbach at all. I wonder when that critical reappraisal occurred. Varlaam (talk) 05:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I seem to remember reading that Debussy much preferred the operettas to Tales, but that was in 1903 before Beecham's 1910 revival restored the opera to the repertory. --Robert.Allen (talk) 09:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The performance history section of the Tales of Hoffmann article is limited. It would interesting to know how many performances were given in the 19th century. --Kleinzach 09:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

It's a bit difficult to call something a masterpiece when so many different versions, most of them unsatisfactory, exist/existed. C19 performances (probably not a complete list) can be found here. --GuillaumeTell 10:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Many, many great unfinished works have been called masterpieces. Michelangelo's 'Slave Awakening' is a good place to start. --Kleinzach 11:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but did anybody chop bits off the sculpture? Did anybody add bits not by Michelangelo on to it? Did anybody rearrange it so that parts of it are in the wrong place? --GuillaumeTell 15:18, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Pls. see my original message to TR (now added above) which explains the context of all this. --Kleinzach 01:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Siegfried Wagner

(Big fan of Contes d'Hoffmann, by the way. One of your girlfriends is evil, one is a robot, we've all been there.)

Isn't it just a little convenient that he writes 18 3-act pieces numbered 1 to 18? C'mon. Where's the juvenilia? Opus 0? Opus 00?
Something is rotten in Denmark, and it's not Ruders' Handmaid's Tale cuz that's a good one.
Varlaam (talk) 05:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

No points for guessing my user name is opera-related. It's too easy. Varlaam (talk)

You have my sympathy, but I didn't create the Opus numbers. If you want to research it there is info here. Best. --Kleinzach 05:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I did some checking yesterday. Not just your source. (Thank you.)

He was very prolific but appears to have held back until he had something really substantial.

(Like Dad?)

That's odd. I don't remember anyone ever commenting on that as they were falling over themselves to dismiss his work.

Varlaam (talk) 21:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I've never heard any of his work, but it's probably quite enjoyable. --Kleinzach 22:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

inactive wikiprojects

Hello Kleinzach. I've added some material to Wikipedia:Inactive wikiProjects and a message on the talk page. I'd be interested in what you think. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Kleinzach 00:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Synopsis headings

I noticed you changed the synopsis headings for La Juive to remove the act subheadings from the TOC. I think this is probably a good idea, since these act descriptions are usually rather short, but I suspect it could be controversial. Should we bring it up on the project page? After all, the guidelines currently call for standard section headings. (Perhaps it could be an alternative format for when they are short.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd forgotten about that. It was a one off. I think I did it for typographical reasons, because the headings looked too big. It's not something I feel strongly about, though it seems a bit redundant to put the acts in the TOC. (I didn't know the guidelines specified standard section headings. Maybe a bit inflexible?) If you want to raise it in the Opera Project that's fine. --Kleinzach 23:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Music theory

Hi - thanks for the note. My idea was to work from Damschroder/Williams book "Music theory from Zarlino to Schenker." That work uses theorists as focal points, using key terms to group similar concepts. So my idea was to go through the alphabetical listing of those considered theorists and add either a stub tab (a few people got upset at that) or the banner (even one person got upset at that and removed the banner). The advantage of using the book is that it provides an organized way of surveying information. It also provides a list of terms. (If I knew how to send you email I'd send my scan of the list of terms). The terms are pretty general, and I'd be surprised if any of them are not in Wikipedia already. The big advantage is that for each term, the book provides the theorists who elaborated on the idea. So it would be less an issue of article creation than of enhancement. Hm, maybe we should continue the discussion on the project page? -- kosboot (talk) 02:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes that would be a good idea. --Kleinzach 02:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

{{Arab-music-stub}}

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Grutness...wha? 01:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Assessment pages don't agree

Hey there. I wonder if you could give me some advice. The assessment pages don't have a matching number. (See example: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_theory/Assessment and the Unassessed_Music_theory_articles - they show two different numbers of unassessed articles).

I did just notice though that the linked pages agree. Do we manually have to change the numbers in the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_theory/Assessment page? --Devin.chaloux (talk) 16:54, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

First of all we don't change the numbers manually. They're automatic. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_theory/Assessment is not working properly. I'll try to work out why. --Kleinzach 00:59, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

OK. I've now put the counter from Category:Music theory articles by quality, which is accurate — you can click on the links to verify this — and put it on the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_theory/Assessment page. This is really a workaround. Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Music theory articles by quality statistics still needs fixing. --Kleinzach 01:18, 13 August 2011 (UTC) P.S. I've referred this here: Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_theory. --Kleinzach 01:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)