User talk:SIMON TAXIS

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VERNON W. PICKERING.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk or via live help

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! A412 (Talk • C) 02:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VERNON W. PICKERING concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VERNON W. PICKERING, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission VERNON W. PICKERING

Hello SIMON TAXIS. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled VERNON W. PICKERING.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VERNON W. PICKERING}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 17:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Opera articles and consensus formatting established by WP:OPERA

In regard to the synopsis which you have been uploading for Fausta (opera), I'd like to draw your attention to the format established by consensus for all opera articles.

I'm attaching the WP:Opera guidelines below, and would ask you to follow them. Please keep being involved with opera articles. Come and join us! Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera/Article guidelines. Thanks, Viva-Verdi (talk) 03:01, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would have nice if you'd followed the basic layout of the synopsis whoch you'll find on almost every other opera article. Meanwhile, not knowing the opera at all, I've done as much as I can to identify scene locations.

Acts are editable and they appear as follows:

===Act 1===

Scenes are numbered sequentially and appear as follows:

Scene 1 - Italicized; no colon is used

Where scene location is known, they appear as:

Scene 1: A palace - Italicized; use a colon after the number.

Thanks for your anticipated cooperation. Viva-Verdi (talk) 19:49, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fausta (opera), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Teatro Regio. 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) 09:04, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your various revisions to Giuseppina Ronzi de Begnis

Thanks for all the work that you are doing on this article. However, I'd like to draw your attention to several protocols which we'd all be grateful if you'd follow:

1. Wiki-linking: It's all very well to do that, but you need to test them before finally saving. (Open another en.wiki page so you can copy and test before you save.) e.g. You linked L'avare (assuming, I assume), that it would take you to the named opera. Of course it doesn't. Same with the opera house in Pesaro: check that article and see what it WAS called before the 1850s. Then it can be linked to using whatever caption you want; it will not appear as a useless red link.

Same applies to opera titles on first appearance.

2. Citations: quotations from sources where you add quotes need a source. Please add them.

3. Lead paragraph: the convention is (i) it begins with the article name; variations can follow from there. (ii) it summarizes the entire aericle, not becomes the only paragraph in the article. Breaking up with sub-headings, when you get as far as you have done, is most helpful.

I hope that you find this to be helpful. Please try to adhere to what are basics for opera articles. It is offered in that spirit, in order that we all can create the best articles.

PS: I have no reference sources at hand since I am away from home, but it would be useful to add her (full, if available) birth and death dates in the first para. Viva-Verdi (talk) 03:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Giuseppe de Begnis

Hello, SIMON TAXIS. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Giuseppe de Begnis, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Giuseppe de Begnis to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, ubiquity (talk) 19:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my mistake. Anyway, I see you added a reference. Thanks. ubiquity (talk) 19:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your blanking of almost the entire page of Giuseppe de Begnis

I hope that your edit which removed almost the entire article (on which you have done valuable work) was made by accident. I've now reverted your edit.

I've advised you in the past week to check your work before saving by pressing the "Show Preview" button. You probably did not do this on this occasion, but I hope that you'll be more careful about wholesale removal of the major part of any article (whether worked on by you or not). Thanks for your cooperation. Keep up the good work on it and provide it with more specific page-by-page citations.

I now have access to some English sources, although I've seen a relatively brief entry in Sadie on him. We need more English resources to which to refer. Viva-Verdi (talk) 06:08, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like direct access to you via email, I could make significant contributions but too many cooks in the kitchen, onwe said he was asking to remove de Begnis because being a living person....nonsense....plus now there was a banner about inline references ??!!?? please contact me at issun@candwbvi.net

see

Hello, SIMON TAXIS. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Giuseppe de Begnis, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Giuseppe de Begnis to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page. Thanks, ubiquity (talk) 19:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. Anyway, I see you added a reference. Thanks. ubiquity (talk) 19:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I assume that are fairly new to Wikipedia, so just a few comments. Am just trying to be helpful - as with, my previous comments about formatting above. However, when I see a paragraph that is 20 lines long, it's pretty clear to me that it needs breaking up. That's where sub-heads come in.

Oh, and we use a colon (or two or three...) to indent a new set of comments for clarity of viewing, so I've indented yours above.

Firstly, of course the deletion is nonsense because the editor didn't read the article properly, but then he retracted.

Secondly, this kind of banner is standard when an article only has one direct specific author/article title/page number to support it. Yes, one other is named under "Sources", but is this a book to which you have access? and, therefore, can add page numbers as appropriate?

Thirdly, if an article in Wikipedia remains almost completely unsourced for a long time, it is likely to get more serious tags added, since the whole basis of WP is that personal opinion isn't allowed and significant statements need to be provided with sources which are notable notable. Sometimes, google searches can bring up all sorts of interesting things, especially these days since many older books have been digitalised.

Regarding another approach, you might consider using your "Sandbox" to prepare articles. I do this all the time, especially recently when I have been working on all of Bellini's operas and considerably adding to the (often) rather sparse existing articles..... Then, when you consider the article to be ready to publish, it can appear as a more-or-less finished version. Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:25, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As usual your suggestions and advice are unconditionally welcome and extremely valuable -- I was attempting for you to get in touch with me directly via e-mail as it would be a more practical way of communicating - this weekend I am taken up with newspaper deadlines, stamp articles etc etc so I will continue to work on de Begnis early next week. I have a few pages of notes I have made from contemporary sources, all will have bibliographic references. These addenda will double what's already there and it will expand on Giuseppe's European and American activities. Needless to say it will put more meat on Giuseppina's bio too. As for Fausta I have the score and I have already reviewed great part of Act I to make notes and comments. When finished I will have a very good friend who teaches at Italian conservatorios to vet my elucubrations. You can check me out, if you like, on the net to get a bit of my background. I live in paradise here in the Virgins..had two heart attacks that almost took me to real paradise but they did not want me there, so I got rejection slip from Peter twice much to the delight of the banker of my cardiologist. Meanwhile happy weekend Giorgio Migliavacca

25 September 2014 - there will be a lot more about Giuseppe de Begnis, I found errors in the Treccani Encyclopedia which gave the wrong opera and date for de Begnis debut at La Scala (this is fixed and tomorrow I put the source and note) and a couple other sources with some inaccuracies..... after Giuseppe I will tackle the rest of Giuseppina Ronzi, but that is a lot to edit and present properly...and then sometime in October Fausta will be finalized -- happy weekend

Giuseppe de Begnis

Found a couple more good refs and added them in, but hold off doing anything else to it until I've seen what you have added re: European additions + those in America: how he got there, why he didn't leave, how he died. The Scottish link will help, but hope you have other sources. Viva-Verdi (talk) 04:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC) There is enough to get a better picture, he has been underestimated in Italy. Also Giuseppina had two brothers who were opera singers (tenors)...it never ends..I found information on them[reply]

I found this banner on the de Begnis entry ----

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2014) -- I do not think it makes sense for me to continue with Wikipedia

Large chunks of text have to have citations as to their source(s). You have to realise that you cannot simply add text that states an opinion without it having a source:

Example: "he impressed the audience" you write. How do you know that was true? Was there a newspaper review so stating? Does some reliable source so state?

Example: "his falsetto stunned the public..." Again, how do we know that this was the case?

You have to understand that Wikipedia works on the basis on verification of statements. No individual opinions are allowed. If there is controversy, both sides in an argument have to be given space. However, it is possible to state that the major favoured opinion A versus a minority with opinion B.

Clearly, you have access to (mostly) non-English language sources, but the reason I changed back to the Grove reference yesterday from an 1860s Italian one (however good it may have been) is that for English Wikipedia regarding opera, Grove is the basic and most reliable source - and is known to be that.

I hope that this helps. You are doing excellent work; you just have to be aware of WP's overall guidelines and philosophy. Take a look at WP:VERIFY, Wikipedia:No original research and WP:NPOV. These are the three major WP guidelines explained for all editors. Viva-Verdi (talk) 15:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - All well documented but I must say good-bye, my blood pressure... and I see no point in giving free work and research without getting any credit, except annoying banners and threats of undoing my work; you were quite helpful but the format and the no rewards situation is not for me - I have to spend what's left of my life pleasantly and completing projects that will reward me in one way or other

Possibly unfree File:1978, Virgin Islands set of four stamps featuring local butterflies.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1978, Virgin Islands set of four stamps featuring local butterflies.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:46, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:1998 Virgin Islands stamp depicting a parader during the Emancipation Festival Parade.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1998 Virgin Islands stamp depicting a parader during the Emancipation Festival Parade.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:47, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Giuseppe de Begnis, opera singer 1822.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Giuseppe de Begnis, opera singer 1822.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 02:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Giuseppe de Begnis.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Giuseppe de Begnis.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 02:02, 16 November 2014 (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) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]