User talk:Springeragh/Archive 19

Signature plaigarism!

You should be ashamed :P Will ^(talk) 02:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was, um, inspired? ~~— $PЯINGεrαgђ~~ Cliff ^(talk) 02:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC) ;)[reply]

My dearest Cliff

You deserve all the hugs
in the world today!
Much love and prayers your way!
Phaedriel - 03:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My special, beloved Cliff... what can I possibly say in a moment like this? My undescribable gratitude to you for the heap of wonderful, loving gestures to me in this, my own Day, fills me with a joy I'll never be able to express. The beauty of the poem you selected for me, the wondrous art you picked, the step you took to dedicate me your time, and this Day, will live in me forever. Your own birthday's here now, and the light hearted jokes and wishes I had planned are clouded by this sad moment you're going through now. All this swirl of emotions and feelings, of sadness and joy, make it impossible to me to make any sense with my limited capacity to put them in readable words.
For these reasons, my friend, may the most heartfelt "thank you" suffice to tell you how deeply you've touched me today, and how special you are to me. This enormous hug I'm sending you is the best way I can think of to tell you, "I love you, my friend - Happy Birthday from me!".
I cross fingers and hope to catch you at Gmail as soon as possible. Until then, my Cliff, just - thank you, I'm so sorry and I'm with you in your sorrow, and I hope to at least gift you a smile on this Birthday. Love you tons, Phaedriel - 03:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spring

Hey Cliff. Yesterday was Phaedriel's birthday and today is yours. I just found that out by the comments on you page. Have a wonderful birthday Cliff. King Lopez ^Contribs 07:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cliff, I have also tried to design a userpage for Riana. But she wasn't completely satisfied with the new design.

Although she said it was beautiful but she wasn't into bright colors. You can view the design in my Sandbox What do you think? King Lopez ^Contribs 07:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tchaikovsky

I'm very sorry about your losing your father. You have my deepest sympathies and are in my prayers.

Tchaikovsky is, for all intents, finished—just some polishing and cleaning up before being submmitted to peer review. The "Compositional style" section became a linked article, with a stub and link in the main article, but as large as it was becoiming, it was only a matter of time before that would happpen.

Looking forward to seeing you back whenever you're ready. Jonyungk 12:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry to hear about your father. jonjonbt (talk•editor review) 20:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also from me. I'm incredibly about for your loss. Also, happy birthday <3 JacќяМ ¿Qué? 20:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am deeply sorry to hear about your father. I want to let you know that I am praying for you. -Tobi4242 23:05, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

Dfrg.msc has smiled at you, revealing rows, upon rows of gleaming pointed teeth. Wait a minute, that's not Dfrg.msc, it's a dragon! Run! Run for your life! Aaaahhhggg!!! Ahhhhhhaaaa!!!! AAAAGGHHGH!!!!!
This confusing and rather contradictory message is probably supposed to promote WikiLove and hopefully has made your day better, or just weirder. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 06:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC). [reply]

I'm very sorry to hear of your loss dear friend. If you need anything at all, I'm just here. Kind regards, Dfrg.msc 10:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the soup by-the-by. I'm still feeling sick, but it's alot better now. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 10:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take as long as you like

Hi Cliff. I want you to know that you can take as long a break as you like (just don't quit). We're here for you, buddy! Ryan ^{Got something to say?} 11:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry

I hope you don't feel too bad, and please know we're here for you.--CJ King 16:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brightest Blessings

Here is a userbox for you. Spread the love, and give it to another user, especially one who is on the down and outs, so that they, too will feel that it is a beautiful day.
{{User:Neranei/userboxes/beautiful}}
User:Neranei/userboxes/beautiful

Have a beautiful day!
I am very sorry over your loss, and hope that you will be blessed in the days to come, with hope, faith, and love.
May you be blessed,
Neranei

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --El on ka 06:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Frédéric Chopin; Symphony No. 39 (Mozart); Violin Concerto No. 3 (Saint-Saëns); Triple Concerto (Beethoven); Bassoon concerto; Evgeny Golubev; Violin Concerto in A minor (Bach); George Enescu; Symphony No. 36 (Mozart); Fritz Seitz; Rotary valve; Symphony No. 38 (Mozart); Cello Concerto No. 1 (Saint-Saëns); Alexander Tcherepnin; Alexis Weissenberg; Violin Concerto in E major (Bach); Albert Dietrich; Giuseppe Martucci; Victorianism

Cleanup: Piano sonata; Symphony No. 10 (Mahler); Piano Sonata (Liszt)
Merge: Life and work of Ludwig van Beethoven; Paganini Variations; Shoe fetishism
Add Sources: Piano quintet; Piano Concerto No. 2 (Beethoven); Symphony No. 25 (Mozart)
Wikify: Cello Concerto (Lalo); Mat Maneri; Mason Williams
Expand: Alexander Pushkin; Piano Concerto No. 2 (Liszt); List of compositions by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 09:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile

Marlith ^T/C has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Cheers!

Hey Spring, that's great! Nice template, I've already user her. Let the great Land-Grab begin! I see you've already claimed my Gallery for the glory of the Republic of Ireland. I would have too, it's quite rich in oil reserves, I see a prosperous future in which the people of my nation and your nation can lead a pointless war against a non-existent enemy. I'm thinking the Super Secret Shadow-Admin Cabal, which controlls every edit. Secretly! With... magnets!

I'm going to go "requisition" some more territory. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 10:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: sarcasm

Well, I'll redouble my efforts to keep my cool, but...did you see what he wrote about me? Honestly, how was I supposed to respond to something like that? K. Lásztocska ^{Review me?} 00:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and I am (and was) very sorry to see you insulted so. In situations like this any person can expect my full sympathy and support. But our chances of that not happening again won't be helped if you respond in like manner, OK? :) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 01:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right, and again, I will try even harder to keep my cool. However, and please understand that I mean you no offense whatsoever by saying this, I'm not sure I appreciate your rebuking me over one instance of fairly benign sarcasm after an outrageous provocation, while you're willing to keep quiet and never rebuke him for his many insults and generally arrogant, rude behavior (behavior which shows no signs of changing, incidentally.) I understand it's all in the interests of keeping the peace, but there comes a time when somebody just has to say "enough of this, you can't treat other people like this and then expect them to help you." We've certainly made our concessions, haven't we? Frankly, I'd like to strip that Thalberg article down to the bare bones and start again from scratch. (Same with Liszt, but that's another story.)

In any event, I just want to get this Thalberg mess into a workable enough state that maybe it could reach GA-class--maybe then our "friend" will finally be satisfied and leave us in peace. K. Lásztocska ^{Review me?} 01:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and I am sorry if I went a little overboard a little too soon with it. Perhaps I should have been more firm with him earlier today. As for stripping the articles down and re-building them—go for it if you want to (just do them in a sandbox and not the mainspace); I'll help you with anything that needs helping. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 02:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, don't worry about it. Thalberg's actually pretty low on my list of priorities right now...i HAVE to finish Szigeti, then I'm going to work on Prague Spring and write some about Hungarian folk music. And Liszt, of course, can't forget him...K. Lásztocska ^{Review me?} 03:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barbarians Who Are Reportedly Peers

Have these people actually read the article? Do we have to make the links to the related articles more obvious? Or should I put up the biggest heading possible that reads, "Here's the Homo Section, Folks!!!!!"

Geez.

Hopefully, there's enough chopped out of the article for the length issue to go away. Right now I don't know where else I could cut. "Tchaikovsky and Dostoyevsky" isn't long enough to become an article on its own (or is it), so for right new it seems like it should stay.

Thanks for jumping in to save the paragraph in the intro, though it can be used in another section of the article if worst comes to worst. Jonyungk 04:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pff. I have a few words about people like that that I can't say on the wiki. Keep it up though, just don't cut too much. ;) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks—glad I'm not the only one who thinks this.

I;ve done less additional editing than reshuffling and (for those who want their shre about Tchaikovsky's homosexuality NOW) some adding from one of the linked articles. The article's baack to 41K, but let's see what happens. Let me know what you think of the "New and Improved" version. Jonyungk 06:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The gay section doesn't seem overly clear

or maybe I'm just either overworking it or have become overconcerned. Are there three points of view on Tchai's comforatbility or loathing of his homosexuality, as the article states, or are there only two? Am I keeping this NPOV, though I'm attempting to give Holden and Poznansky roughly equivalent time as well as otehr sources Holden cites? ARRRRGGGGGGGHHHHH. Jonyungk 01:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my two kopeks on Pyotr Ilyich

I haven't the time right now to look at the whole Tchaikovsky article (more tomorrow, I hope), but since I noticed there's been some unrest over the "gay section", I figured I'd take a look at it and offer my own opinion, for what it's worth. You may take it with a grain of salt, however, as I am in fact shamefully poorly-versed in Tchaikovskiana... :(

Personally, I would trim down the gay section a bit, try to still get the point across but in a more compact fashion. One thing that often bothers me when I do read about or discuss Tchaikovsky is the tendency for his homosexuality to become the main topic of conversation, invoked as the primary motivation for nearly everything he ever did, and elevated to the single defining characteristic of his life. I certainly don't mean to diminish its importance (obviously someone's sexuality is a very significant part of their identitity) but I want to avoid putting excessive emphasis on it as well. I don't know how many times I've heard poor Tchaikovsky reduced to a one-dimensional caricature on account of his homosexuality--basically people end up ignoring all the other facets to his life and personality in order to concentrate on all the juicy details of his scandalous love life. (Like Dostoyevsky always said: the public loves scandal above all.)

One other thing: just how prevalent are the opinions of the people who think he wasn't gay? I always thought it was pretty well agreed among everybody that he was, especially with evidence like that letter to Modest (what other "tendency" could they be talking about?) Something somehow seemed out of balance in the section--either the "he wasn't gay" arguments need to be presented in more detail, or less space needs to be used establishing that he was actually gay. (As it is currently, it vaguely gives me the odd impression that a very flimsy hypothesis is being disproved with disproportionate strength--over-debunked, if you like.)

Anyway, those are just some late-night impressions of a slightly insane violinist, take them or leave them. I'd love to see Tchaikovsky get his very own featured article (am I overusing my italics tonight?) and if you need any help, please don't hesitate to ask me, I'll do what I can. Cheers, K. Lásztocska 05:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say pretty late-night—it was after I went to bed! :P

Thank you for your opinion; it will probably help us much. (Scholar talk?) Jonyungk and I could surely use it. :) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 15:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've got a terrible habit of staying up till 3 in the morning lately, totally wired for no apparent reason. Let me know if there's anything else I can do for Tchaik...K. Lásztocska 16:07, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, until I came across the original version of this Wiki article, I wasn't aware of any scholars saying Tchaikovsky wasn't gay and figured it was my own ignorance for not knowing this. But now I'm starting to feel overwhelmed by the folk who seem to be saying, "If you don't say Tchaikovsky was happily gay, then stay away!" Your opinion really helps. Thanks very much from me too. Jonyungk 07:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

zOMG

ROFLMAO. What on earth is "Editors for deletion", and why have I never seen it before? Looks like the work of the Cabal...K. Lásztocska 23:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't figure it out at first. Then I just voted in a language that most of them don't understand. :P — $PЯINGεrαgђ 00:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Condolences

Cliff,

We have not talked much, but I come in contact with a lot of your work here on WikiPedia quite often. I suppose I should check your userpage more often.... Anyway, you have my heart-felt shared sorrow about the loss of your father. If you need anything - and I mean ANYTHING - and I can do it, please feel free to contact me either on wiki or offline through E-mail. Please, during the grieving process, do not forget to celebrate his life, as well as grieving his passing. This little piece of advice helped me greatly when my mother died, maybe it can help you too.

With all empathy, - NDCompuGeek 03:26, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tchaikovsky's finiahed, finally and for the last time (?)

Went through the gay/marriage/Dostoyevsky section one more time to smooth out the writing and changed some (minor) things in other sections. Everything seems to work pretty well and there's nothing more I can really do for the article constructively. It's done, I'm done and guess we'll see what happens from here

BTW, are the "peers" going to give more feedback or look over the article opnce more, or is the one shot they gave basically it? Just wondering. Jonyungk 21:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. To be safe I would wait until there haven't been any reviews for a week before archiving it. Then it's across the creaking rope bridge to FAC… — $PЯINGεrαgђ 22:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thalberg worklist

Eh, no problem at all. Our friend seems to be in an exceptionally good mood today, incidentally, have you noticed? :) K. Lásztocska 23:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I went and did the same thing to the Bartok worklist I separated from the main article a few days ago--but zOMG, look what I accidentally did at first!! NEVER make me type the word "list" when I'm thinking even *remotely* about music-related matters!!! K. Lásztocska 23:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OH. MY. GOSH. That was, seriously, the best laugh I've had in ages. I mean my sister came running I was laughing so hard. So congratulations. ;) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 03:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, glad I could provide such amusement! Seriously though, YOU try typing "List" without a "z" while thinking about Hungarian music! And capitalized at that! K. Lásztocska 04:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have the same problem, but it's not quite that bad. Although occasionally I will type one when I want to type the other. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 04:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goldmark

Oh yeah, Karcsi Goldmark! I keep forgetting he was Hungarian...I've been preoccupied with Koppány lately anyway--can you BELIEVE we didn't have an article about him until today?? Goldmark's violin concerto is a strange piece of work, btw--I love the third movement but the rest is a meandering mess...K. Lásztocska 20:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I heard, um, one of the movements on the radio several days ago (if The Record Shelf has an article, it was on there—well I guess also if it doesn't have an article it was still on there) but only about five minutes of it. I don't know which movement it was but I really liked it, and I hope it's popular enough to find a good recording of… — $PЯINGεrαgђ 20:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Milstein's recording is supposed to be the best one out there, especially if, like me, you're a sucker for those old-fashioned Golden Age violinists...K. Lásztocska 23:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He may have been the violinist in the recording—I didn't hear the name, but it was certainly before 1960. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 23:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

zomg gtalks

...or is your connection being sucky (if it is, udnerstandable)? Will ^(talk) 23:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read that as "stalk" at first. :/ Um, no I'm not on right now, but I was earlier (a lot earlier). — $PЯINGεrαgђ 23:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe

Nice edit summaries :p ~ Riana ⁂ 02:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've learned from Antandrus' block logs. :P — $PЯINGεrαgђ 02:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, as good a place to draw inspiration from as any. I particularly like his '...' blocks. ~ Riana ⁂ 02:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can almost hear him saying "yet another bloke to block…" — $PЯINGεrαgђ 02:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, yes. 'Ah yeah, another one. Whatever.' ~ Riana ⁂ 02:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Message Bar

Thanks Cliff. I am going to ask the great master Riana to help me on this. Cheers :) King Lopez ^Contribs 09:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]