User talk:R.christie

Some tips

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Your contributions to Peter Hugh McGregor Ellis (or any other article) are most welcome. I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Introduction, and then Wikipedia:Tutorial to learn how to edit pages. You should also read WP:NPOV carefully, as you will be editing on controversial articles.-gadfium 08:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot email you, as you need to authenticate your email address. You do this by clicking on "My preferences" and following the steps given there. Mostly, people on Wikipedia communicate via talk pages and not by email anyway. If you wish to reply to me on this talk page, I'll see it.

Out of interest, how did you come to know about the Peter Ellis article?-gadfium 08:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I thought you might like to know that the "+" tab just to the right of the "edit this page" tab will create a new section for you. (It took me a long time to notice this. :-) ) This tab only appears on talk pages.

You might also like to sign your talk page posts using four tildes (~~~~). This adds your username (wikilinked to be accessible) and the date.

The links in gadfium's welcome message above are full of other useful tips. -- Avenue 15:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To create a new section manually (not using the "+" tab, which only occurs on talk pages and only using the default skin for Wikipedia), just put the title in between double equals signs, like this ==This is a heading==, but on its own line. If you look at the editable text of this page, you'll see the "Some tips" header above is formatted like this.

The best thing to do to get the hang of the syntax is to experiment, using the "Show preview" button a lot. Good places to experiment include the Wikipedia:Sandbox, Wikipedia:Introduction, and here, your own talk page.-gadfium 18:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Teaching Music is No Mean Feat - Agreed

Richard, I agree that teaching, in fact any work at all in music is no mean feat in NZ where art and creativity has been undervalued for decades. It seems to be swinging finally but I know literally hundreds of musicians who lived their passion for music peformance and hardly any made enough to live. On th eother side I have worked with many guys who have or are teaching one way or another, Drummer for Hard to Handle / Hipshooters is/was a music teacher at Tauranga High, the bass player for New Zealand Country Music Greats, Jodie Vaughn, Eddie Low, Drifters, Tania Rowles, was an english teacher at Whangarei High, Midge Marsden teaches music and production at Waikato Polytech and Harry Lyon teaches at Music and Audio Institute (head of Department) [1]. My mother in law taught music theory, piano and singing all her life in Hamilton and Tauranga. My partner is a teacher, my brother is a teacher, I taught electronic security in sydney while i was with Chubb Australia and I taught computing at Aotea College. Neil Reynolds taught drumming in Hamilton for many years prior to setting up Musicare. If those names are red its because they dont have articles yet, I'll get to them if no one else does before me. the music climate in NZ was very tough in th e60's and 70's, thats why all the passionate musicians went to Australia, and got funded by Australian record companies. Listen to Culture by he Knobz for instance, Rob Muldoon had sales tax on pop and jazz, but not on classical and opera. I engineered and did sound and lights for thousands of shows, beginning with Human Instinct and The Game in 1969. I played records several times a week for 6 or 7 years in the 70's, and shot piles of video and did live sound recording in oz with both kiwi and oz musos, for most of the 80's. I write all this because I find a lot of resistance in this space to kiwi people who dont have a book or a record published, but its all music to me in the end. I need help to know more about copyright, I want to take my quality and unique live 70's recordings of BIG names and use samples to build new songs, that are then licensed to me. cheersmoza 05:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Ceci material from Ellis page

Thanks for the warning, and the offer of support. I have left a message on the deleter's talk page, to see if we can resolve it directly first without having to involve everyone. -- Avenue 07:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All I've done so far is ask why the material was deleted, so don't worry - you haven't led me to rush into anything I would regret. If it turns out that it was to avoid duplication, I think the first mention would probably be a better candidate for removal, as it is not in chronological order. But I'll see what response I get first. -- Avenue 10:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments in article

Please don't place comments about the NPOV tag in the article. That's not the way things are done here. Keep debating on the talk page.-gadfium 04:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ellis page

You're welcome. It is an interesting topic, although probably too ambitious a choice for the first NZ collaboration - I often feel that I'm in over my head. But the article seems to be progressing well. I'm hopeful we can develop something that is neutral without being neutered. -- Avenue 04:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my mistake on the London et al reference. I checked for it in the notes section but didn't check the references section. Having it there is fine. -- Avenue 11:53, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the appropriate fair use tag to the image, and adapted the fair use rationale a bit to fit this image better. Hopefully that'll be acceptable to anyone reviewing it. By the way, the caption in the article says it was taken in 1993, but the image name says 1992. Do you know which is correct? -- Avenue 12:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Classical guitar project

Hi! Do you want to join the Classical guitar project? Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical guitar

How?Richard 06:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Yang Xuefei?

Bonjour Richard!

Yang Xuefei commence à être assez connu en Europe et j’imagine qu’il en est de même aux USA et en Chine. Certains guitaristes renommés ont également une très bonne opinion d’elle. (Je pourrais vous donner des noms par email.) Il est en fait impossible de savoir quels sont les guitaristes de la nouvelle génération qui compteront réellement demain (voir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_guitarists#Promising_talents ). Mais je pense qu’il est malgré tout préférable d’écrire quelques noms, en se basant sur des faits objectifs (qualités d’interprète, concerts dans des grandes salles, disques, etc.). (YX a joué à la Berliner Philharmoniker il y a quelques mois et elle avait aussi joué à la Concertgebouw d’Amsterdam il y a plus d’un an). J’avais choisi la photo de YX pour illustrer la parti « Contemporary classical guitar » de l’article « History of the classical guitar » car sa photo était disponible sur wikipedia et qu’il me semblait que ce n’était ni plus juste, ni plus faux, que de choisir la photo de quelqu’un d’autre. Le mieux serait peut-être de mettre la photo d’un anonyme dans une situation de concert qui illustre bien ce qu’est la guitare classique aujourd’hui, comme un ensemble de musique contemporaine incluant un guitariste.

J’ai commence la page du Project Classical guitar, si vous avez des idées n’hésitez pas à la compléter.

J’ai créé hier l’article Multi-string classical guitar.

Merci beaucoup pour vos contributions!

J’espère que vous arrivez à comprendre mon français. Si vous le souhaitez je peux le traduire en anglais.

Mon email adresse est accessible sur mon site qui est en lien sur ma page d’utilisateur.

Grégory 14:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Grégory, Je remercie de votre réponse. Mon Français est rudimentaire. Si je ne comprends pas tout message puis j'utilisez un traducteur électronique. Je suis désolé que j'aie enlevé le nom de Yang Xuefei. J'ai agi en vitesse. Je pense que mon utilité principale pour le projet traditionnel de la guitare est tout en éditant et en augmentant des articles plutôt que pour commencer de nouveaux articles. Mes contributions peuvent également être erratiques selon des contraintes de temps. Je suis heureux que les artistes de concert tel que vous-même contribuent. Le respect le plus élevé Richard 03:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Trace Elliot Bonneville rear view.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Trace Elliot Bonneville rear view.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Recent edits at Syd Barrett

Hello, can you please explain your recent edits and comments on Syd Barrett? I would suggest you to be bold and change the article according to the information that you have.--Doktor Who 12:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that you misunderstood my above message: I suggested to be "bold", that means in Wikipedia slang that you are free and welcome to rewrite the aticle and delete any untrue info. It doesn't mean that you will not be reverted. Before posting "my sentence" there, I discussed it in the talk page, in other terms I asked for permission; none else has ever done it on that article, everybody come at Syd Barrett and change sentences with no discussion. My behaviour has been different, for that reason the sentence is still there.--Doktor Who 13:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understood you perfectly. Your claim above that no one else has used the discussion page as you describe is arrant nonsense. Curious readers of the preceeding are invited to read talk:Syd Barrett "musical influences" 8Aug2006 for futher information Richard 09:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure you understood, please read my recent post at talk:Syd Barrett and my recent edit in the same article: I deleted that sentence (aren't you happy now?) becouse I do not want to re-edit and /or beging an edit war with you or anyone else. So I can't understand what else do you want from me. Best wishes. Doktor Who 09:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<groan> Richard 09:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Richard, there is nothing personal, the point is that I' m really tired to talk about Syd Barrett, with all due respect. The first time I messaged you above, I was trying to be nice and encourage you to be bold and edit with no fear, even deleting sentences that you believe are merely POV. I have got an idea: I am setting the Email this user facility here, I invite you to do the same, so we can email each other and talk , from a technical point of view, about Barrett's technique. How does that sound to you? As soon as I buy a new webcam, I could also show exactly how he did play and moved his hand over the frets of his guitars, and why this is important to punk, post-punk, dark wave and grunge. I hope you'll agree and join. Cheers.Doktor Who 13:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind offer. I have passed licentiate examinations in guitar performance, I have undertaken a 3 year University course in the same [which included academic courses in advanced musical analysis, harmony etc and the history of guitar performance styles and general music history], I have attended and participated in masterclasses by some of the world's leading performers, I have made a full time living from both performance and teaching the instrument for many years. I list this background so that you will understand why I politely decline your offer to be enlightened as to how Barrett "moved his hand over the frets" - I feel perfectly qualified to undertake that myself. Thank you all the same. Richard 01:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if my words seemed to mean that I was trying to teach something in any way, I am not a teacher, I am just a person that believes in open source (and in open minds).Dr. Who 08:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contact details

May I have your personal telephone number and email address? There is nothing personal, do no take it in the wrong way, the point is that in last 2 years I've been harrassed and hacked several times on the web.If you are a real person, I mean the real Richard Christie that lives in New Zealand, you shouldn't have any problem with my request. Dr. Who 13:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly not. You have misrepresented my position on Wiki pages on more than one occasion, accordingly I have no confidence in your integrity. RichardJ Christie 21:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, your tone and style sounds like a 60 years old woman, surely not the tone of a musician or a music lover. If asked by the FBI or Jimbo Wales, I can post my contact details here. Are you so brave to do the same? I guess not, becouse we both know (you and I) which is your real identity. Bye.Dr. Who 21:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A record of these discussions is accessible on Talk:Syd Barrett subject 'Musical Influence' also 'Syd Barrett The Guitarist' for additional background) and within talk Dr. Who. Dr. Who's intemperate remarks in the History page of Barrett article are also on the record. The record speaks for itself, as do the last comments above. RichardJ Christie 22:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your continuous personal attacks to me speak for themselves. There is only one logical reason that prevents Jimbo Wales and other administrators to block you, and the reason is that they very likely know your real identity. Dr. Who 22:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the first time I will make a personal comment about you. I can only conclude that you really are quite cognitively disturbed. You are at liberty to believe whatever flights of the imagination you wish to but kindly refrain from inflicting them upon the pages of Wikipedia.RichardJ Christie 02:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poll on Syd Barrett re: keeping or deleting the mental illness paragraph

Please participate in the poll I've set up at Talk:Syd_Barrett#Poll_on_keeping_a_paragraph_on_Mental_Illness_or_deleting_it TheQuandry 17:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watson book

Thanks for the book suggestion - maybe one of these days I'll find the time to understand the Watson case properly. And thanks for the words of appreciation. -- Avenue 02:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guitar

Thanks. What needs to be addressed? I guess we could go more into the guitar's earlier Andalusian history. MegX 03:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments Richard, please read my statement regarding my position on this issue at User:MegX/Statement. I have requested that a neutral party mediate this issue. MegX 02:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guitar - A transposing instrument?

I'm not so sure. Classical repertoire is properly written in a transposed treble clef, that is, a treble clef with an "8" in ligature below it. While many publishers omit the "8", doing so is a publication shorthand not a reliance on the transposing nature of the instrument. I've never thought of or heard the guitar described as a transposing instrument in the sense that a trumpet (for example) would be. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 03:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was always taught that the "8" indicated that the clef showed notes an octave lower than the standard treble clef. Hence, it is a different clef, not a transposing instrument. I would compare the situation to a viola (alto) clef where the notes appear on the staff a fifth higher than they would on a treble cleff. And I would contrast against, for example, a Bb trumpet part that is written with an ordinary treble clef and with a key signature that is off by a tone. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 23:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Youtube

Oh, I just realised that you play classical guitar too, do you have a youtube (or other video site)account that you upload your guitar playing to? I would love to see it. --Da Vynci 17:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Curse

LOL yes. --Da Vynci 21:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi R.christie! Thanks for the kind words you left on my talk page. I might include some more thoughts on guitar technique if I find time to order some ideas. By the way, I'm aware and appreciate your edits also! Regards, TheRationalGuitarist 00:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Segovia Edits

Hi R.christie. Good choice of words in the second paragraph of the section on the controversy. I'm referring to the change from "this view has changed" to "this view has been called into question." I am a little ambivalent about the addition of Segovia's goals. While they were Segovia's stated goals, in GR32, as you pointed out, there is something about his choice of words in the first two goals that chafes a bit and seems to feed the hype machine. The uncritical reader continues to be in awe of the wrong things, and the critical reader sees pontification. Do we really need this in this article?

Thanks for your candide, and as usual, insightful response to my misgivings. I see your point, that the goals should invite discussion. Only, lets keep it out of the article, lest it degenerate once again - and I'm still not convinced that it is as objective as it needs to be. I'm sure you agree that the proper place for debate is the discussion page. Robert Phillips Rguitphil Dec. 4, 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 18:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Segovia's portrait

I was reading Segovia's article and saw your drawing. Great job~ --Da Vynci (talk) 21:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy metal / classical influence

Hi Richard, I can see from the talk page that you've been involved in a discussion on the this section: Heavy_metal_music#Classical_influence

I've made some further suggestions and would encourage you to post your thoughts.

Cheers! Onesecondglance (talk) 09:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait

Hi, thanks a lot for uploading Image:Andres_Segovia_Dobson.jpg. Do you happen to know how old he was when the photo was taken? Thanks, AxelBoldt (talk) 00:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I asked because I wanted to add the information to the image page and also as an image caption to his article. It's a general nitpick of mine that photos should be dated, and this drawing is as good as a photo. It's a very nice image though, even without that information. Cheers, AxelBoldt (talk) 16:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be sure: there is a notice «Artist Daphne Dobson. No copyright claimed» on the description page of the image, and below there is {{PD-user-w|en|wikipedia|R.christie}} template, which claims that the author is R.christie (you). As far as I understand, the artist (Daphne Dobson) is author of the image. Does «No copyright claimed» means that you have explicit permission for releasing this image to the public domain from the author? Ilya Voyager (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[moved from Ilya Voyager]

Daphne Dobson gave me the pencil sketch of Andres Segovia in 1994. It is my property. The scan was made by me. No copyright has ever been asserted. Hope that helps. RichardJ Christie (talk) 22:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it is not enough. «No copyright has ever been asserted» does not mean that there's no copyright: according to Berne convention, copyrights for creative works are automatically in force upon their creation without being asserted or declared. Therefore, we must have explicit permission to use this work for any purposes (including commercially), to make modifications, and so on. Otherwise, it's not free and it is not in PD. The ownership of the copy of this work does not transfer you the copyright. Your scan is a derivative work of the original, so you are unable to publish it as PD, unless you have explicit permission from the author to do so. I like this sketch very much, but unfortunately our rules are rather strict on copyright-related issues, and unless valid permission from the author will be received (see Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission for details), it seems that we'll have to delete this image from the Commons. Ilya Voyager (talk) 10:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtess self appointed police such as you will do as you please, making the world a happier placeand so shall I. The sketch is on an old piece of newsprint, I think I might just go and burn it. RichardJ Christie (talk) 04:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prisoner categories

I've replied on my talk page. Sorry for the slow reply. -- Avenue (talk) 15:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Allan Thomas

Adding the Royal Commission report to the Arthur Allan Thomas was a good move. If it is possible can you add it to WikiMedia Commons? Such an important document needs a "secure" home. Also, it should be used as a reference to expand the article so I want it in a sort of "official" location on the interweb thingy. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 19:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, R.christie. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:1992-PeterEllis.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:1992-PeterEllis.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:11, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, R.christie. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, R.christie. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]