User talk:Makemi/Archive6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For old discussions please see

Please add new comments to the bottom of the page. I will most likely respond on your talk page.


Contents

[edit] That google book thing

I can't believe I've never been there before... how many pages do you get to see before it shuts you out? there's all kinds of stuff scanned by Google. Holy @#$%. /me feels like a n00b. Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This your IP???

This your IP? Aquafish talk 22:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Um, WP:AGF? Mak (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] The Erotic Network

Hey Buddy, where's my article, why did you delete it?? I see no justification for deleting it, spam my a$$!! Why don't you write a better one, instead of going around deleting other people's articles. Under what authority can you delete articles, I would like to know??? HeMan5 04:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it because it seemed like it was solely for promotional purposes, it's a porn network, which are a dime a dozen, and the only "references" were to the parent company, rather than an neutral independent source. Spam is now a speedy deletion criterion. I was made an administrator by the Wikipedia community, who entrusted me with power to delete things, an action which can, of course, be reversed by the community or another administrator. Mak (talk) 04:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Montpellier Codex

Hi, you posted a little hello note on my talk page, I think it must have been after I wrote the Montpellier Codex article. I'm not entirely new to Wikipedia, but just this week I saw a number of rather gaping holes, a few of which I decided to patch. I am more or less entirely new to the community aspect of the site. So, hello! Chubbles1212 04:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA?

Hi, Makemi. If I could borrow 2 minutes of your time - I would like one more pair of eyes on Agrippina (opera). I'm just about to put it forward for GA, but I'd like someone else to check that there isn't anything particularly grotesque that a GA reviewer would bawl me out for. If you could just check this article out for me, that would be great.

The thing that really cheesed me off was that I wrote this from ONE source - and I have to provide a load of inline cits. Inline cits are wonderful, but not when there's only one source involved. Then it's not a little stupid. Anyway. If you could give me the green light for GA, I'd really appreciate it. Cheers, Moreschi 18:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll look at it now. Mak (talk) 21:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This

Sorry for that blank space, my fault. --Emx 18:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Early

I'm one of those bizarre people who likes to see the sun rise. It's quiet at this time and I can think about stuff and write without being bothered by the phone. :-) Having heard you sing, at least via .ogg, I have complete faith in you. Wish I could be there .... Antandrus (talk) 15:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok then, I won't bother you with orange bars either :) Have a fun day, think of me 2-ish EST. Mak (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

whyyyy Thank you! I didn't realize that. Hey. I got a question for you, maybe? I want to (re)submit Dallas, Texas for FA status.. How does one get a peer review done of an article? Thanks drumguy8800 C T 03:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flourishment

[1] -- how are you going to handle the "fl. xxxx-xxxx"? I always have trouble with this. Once upon a time the List of Renaissance composers was in birth order (someone changed it, rather to my annoyance, but I haven't changed it back) -- anyway it's a problem I haven't solved. Any thoughts? Antandrus (talk) 04:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Ach, I don't know. I was thinking of asking you. Also, the people who only have a known death date are a problem. I'm really just trying to do it to help with categorizing, and making sure they're on the correct "List of x composers" lists, so being exact isn't that important. I might just put the flourishing people with people who were probably born around the same time (figure at least 16 years before flourishing, and just kind of smack them in).
BTW, nevermind about that link, I found out about it when I was at the concert, and then they were rebroadcasting it once, but that's over now :( Arrrr, it was ok, I never know how to feel about concerts. I could have done better, maybe, but there were no mistakes which would be obvious to someone who didn't know the piece, I think. There were, of course, microphone problems, but they weren't a huge deal. Mak (talk) 04:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Still wish I'd heard it. :-) I was having family dinner so I was late anyway; I can get the stream if I open a port in my firewall.
Previously I'd been adding 20 or 25 years to the initial fl. date to put them in the list if they were composers, so sounds like we had the same idea. Another possibility is having separate headings "17th century birthdate not known" "18th century birthdate not known" etc. But it's more useful than simple alpha order I think. Antandrus (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] baroque quetion

Thanks, but I think I shold just find the answers myself now because its probably going to be considered cheating by my teacher. # BROWNSAY SOMETHING!!! | 13:58, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit]  ?

How do you archive your page? Shadin Thanks! Shadin was clueless

[edit] Need assistance

I talk to you because you greeted me when I (finally) signed up months ago.

I have an administrator that chastised me, undid my edits, and referred me to the style manual - which shows that I was completely correct in what I did. Now, this admin will NOT respond, and I have said that I am now going to let the sloppiness, misspellings, bad grammar, and poor writing go unedited by me.

Isn't there an element of responsibility involved with being an admin? Apollyon48 06:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes admins get busy in Real Life at times that are annoying to other users. No one has an absolute obligation to spend any time on Wikipedia whatsoever. I can't see where this conflict is taking place. If the admin was incorrect and doesn't say anything more, I suggest you just be bold and follow the appropriate guideline. Admins don't actually have any extra editorial control or even insight than any other editor. I don't see that there's anything specific I can do for you, other than suggest you simply continue editing, and not necessarily press for an apology. Mak (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Wonder why you delete my page as it is as important as your page which talk about your personal musical interest. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wpgoh (talk • contribs).

[edit] prize

hi Mak, thank you very much for correcting the price/prize, it is an award. I have now deleted the text in the price article since I couldn't find a way to change the spelling mistake in the title. now i cannot work out how to delete the entire article, so it's empty and I have made the article under the right name- prize. If you can help me I will appreciate it. Thank you again, English is not my first language and I'm new at this Tinebrown 06:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Quintana

Thank you. That was getting rather tiring. --Geniac 02:39, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Would it be possible to change the "this article's entry on articles for deletion" wikilink at Brian Quintana to point to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian quintana (lowercase q) or to create a redirect at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Quintana (uppercase Q) pointing there? --Geniac 15:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I think it's fixed. Mak (talk) 15:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! Also, I've just found that User:Wikwnick has created BrianQuintana (no space). Thought you should know. --Geniac 17:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
This looks like the same article repeatedly recreated (and speedied G4) a few days ago by Dollys (talk • contribs). Similar content, without the links, (also updated by Dollys) is at User:Brianq. Fan-1967 18:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The issues with this article are somehow related to the edit wars/vandalism referenced at WP:ANI#Pedro Zamora and Judd Winick. I can't keep the parties straight, but clearly one should not invite Winick and Quintana (or their friends) to the same party. -- Fan-1967 18:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
What a mess. Does anything need to be done about it at the moment? Mak (talk) 20:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Don't think so. There's a note in ANI to keep an eye on the Zamora and Winick articles. Some sort of ongoing feud between Winick and Quintana. Current issue seems to be caused by Quintana and/or his supporter(s). Fan-1967 20:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Should BrianQuintana get the same treatment as Brian Quintana? --Geniac 12:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Brian Quintana II. --Geniac 18:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Argh. Deleted, not salted, but watchlisted, re-creator sock indef-blocked for disruption. Mak (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Listing by date

That's actually pretty funny; you could have a new cat. We have a category for year of birth unknown, maybe one for year of birth unstated ... Putting her with the "flourished" group as 20 years older might be a good idea. You have to put her somewhere. Alternatively have a separate sublist for year-of-birth-unknown-or-unstated for those who are still living. Hm ... Antandrus (talk) 04:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks..

For the support in my crusade of stomping out vandals. I'm getting more accustomed to the correct warnings to use and how to use them. It seems like you've checked up on me today.. I really appreciate it. :D --Bluesquareapple 16:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

This is my favorite community I've ever been part of. The vandals aren't very smart, though.. I'm just here to help sustain Wikipedia in it's designed state. --Bluesquareapple 16:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your prompt help

i'm impressed with your promptness in getting things done. I was wondering how to change the heading of the article Singapore life church to Singapore Life Church as a delete would not work and i'm impressed with the solution you have done - redirect the old page to the new page. Thanks again Mak. Wpgoh 18:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem! After you've been here a little while you get a "move" tab along with the "edit" and "history" tabs, and you can change an article's title with that. Mak (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Busted

LOL, I was at work and got interrupted before I could complete the replacement ... heh... :-0 Antandrus (talk) 01:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 :) Mak (talk)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for the welcome, I really appreciate it! Neil Erickson 22:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Neil Erickson

[edit] Offended?

Me? God no. I'm sorry I didn't back to you earlier about the continuo, but I've been rather busy and then this Boisseau nonsense flared back into life over the last few days, as you know. I'll sort it out later this evening - I would do it now but I'm just off to play to tennis, would you believe. I've got three matches (in one day!!) to play for my county tomorrow and I need to get some decent practice in. Hope all the singing is going well - I listened to your recordings at Dido and Aeneas and Lute song and your voice sounded sublime. Cheers, Moreschi 10:38, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

lol, I think sublime might be going a bit far, but thanks. The singing went pretty well, plus I got my first NYT review! Yay! I'm glad you're not offended about the continuo thing, it can be so hard to tell online sometimes. Good luck with your matches. Mak (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Ooh. Is there an online link where I can read the review? E-mail the response to me if you want, it's not a great idea for the deranged vandals of this world to work out who the people who revert and block them are. Matches tomorrow, so early bed tonight. Moreschi 15:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
You have mail. Moreschi 09:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and one more thing: would you mind checking out Agrippina (opera) again, and my post on the talk page? I think the recitative problems have been fixed. Moreschi 16:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out. BTW, how well do you understand all this copyright stuff? I just uploaded [2] to Commons, but is that O.K? I thought so anyway, seeing as the painter died about 280 years ago. Moreschi 19:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
(Eavesdropping) As far as I understand it, a two-dimensional reproduction, which is not in itself original, of an image which is itself in public domain, is not protected. See the {{PD-art}} template and info; here's the first example I found Image:Rembrandt_van_rijn-self_portrait.jpg. Of course IANAL and all that, but I think we're safe on this kind of stuff. Antandrus (talk) 21:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, two dimensional images of PD two dimensional objects should be PD, according to Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. in the US. It's not as certain that this applies to two dimensional images of things which come out of PD books, although as a non-lawyer I'd say it probably does. Mak (talk) 23:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List

You're welcome! :-) Hey, if you're anything like me, that forest of redlinks makes me want to turn my cell phone OFF, shut the door, and hole up with a stack of encyclopedias for a week or two. Antandrus (talk) 00:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Heck yeah :) Mak (talk) 01:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Nice work adding the names!! We've needed that. :) Antandrus (talk) 03:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Duck Butter

Thanks for stepping in and pouring some oil on troubled waters: he did seem disgruntled, didn't he? Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 09:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flow my tears

God I love this piece. I'm listening to my various recordings of it ... Andreas Scholl does it a minor third lower than you (in F# minor); I've got Emma Kirkby in a pile of CDs somewhere else, and yet another somewhere. Thanks for putting up the article up! Could use a bit on its 20th century use ... or anything else. It's incredibly famous. Nice work! Antandrus (talk) 01:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AWB

I totally understand your anger. Perhaps you could contact Martin about this problem with Priest and Preist. IA (talk) 19:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[3] - LOL!! I nearly fell off the chair! Moreschi 19:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC) (There's nothing worse than a woman scorned - except a messed-up machine...).
Zomg, I am so not a woman scorned. I was a woman hungry and irritated. Plus, I haven't told you I'm a woman, so you have to put any references to me as such "in" "quotes". The problem is, I don't want to have to babysit my articles from vandals, trolls, POV pushers, and well-meaning people who can't watch their bots properly. Perhaps the comment will fix the problem, but probably not. Mak (talk) 22:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
No, I wasn't saying you were. The intention was to compare the sterotypical "woman scorned" (Hell hath no fury etc) to a that effects of a bot going crazy. Anyway, I'm still laughing. I've put the Preist (come on, fix it AWB people. Dare ya!!) article on my watchlist, something I should have done before, so two pairs of eyes can watch it. BTW, I'll be away in Dorset Monday-to-Friday, so no wiki for me. See you round! Moreschi 22:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah, thank you for the much needed laugh. I feel much better now about not making myself learn those god-damned automated "tools". (I even RC patrol the old-fashioned way, i.e. using that much disparaged but occasionally useful quality known as "human intuition".) Antandrus (talk) 22:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A mutual friend of ours

I know technically an admin should have responded to this request, but I felt that my response was appropriate. Feel free to overrule me. Fan-1967 22:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you're completely right. Mak (talk) 22:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I got a note from her you may find interesting: User talk:Fan-1967#Hello from Christina. -- Fan-1967 20:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Page move

Thanks - I didn't know what to do because of the redirect. I was afraid of creating 'double-re-direct'. I didn't know the page history would be lost. Silverwhistle 11:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

re: Jacuzzi Edit After citing the patent number, and verifying that Candido, Not Roy was the inventor I have re-edited the page.

I have also re-added the link to Jason International, which is owned by the Jacuzzi Family. pajacuzzi

[edit] Don't worry.

I only gave her page a cursory look. I wasn't aware it was a C&P until I looked at their edit log. I was actually referring to myself. I should have caught that. HalfShadow 00:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Updated DYK query On 2 November 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Flow my tears, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 08:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning "Flow my teares"

Could you please point me - which of your links provide the score for the song instead of the one I put in and you deleted? Thanks. Architeuthis 16:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

They don't, but the link you provided doesn't lead directly to the score, and after the maze of links you have to follow, you don't get to a good edition, you get to a so-so vocal-only edition, which in terms of this song is kinda pointless. Sorry, I meant to put removing the link in my edit summary. Mak (talk) 18:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] That B.S.

Ah, yes, cheap thrills :-) ... and with this one [4] originally I had "ass backwards contributor" but decided that might stray beyond the civility boundary. Too bad though, I thought it was funnier. Antandrus (talk) 22:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I seem to remember that block. You're always so civil! I tend to sit on the line of civility too often, I think (see above... well, anywhere). But usually if I cross the line I'm pretty quick to apologize, so I guess that's good. Mak (talk) 22:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MDM Fiber

Our external links to mdmfiber.com (a 100% recycled carpet fiber) are certainly relevant and important to the articles to which we attach them. Suggest you learn about the material. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paulbracegirdle (talk • contribs).

  • If you look at the other links on those pages, you'll see that they are far more applicable and widely relevant than your commercial link to a commercial company. Your use of the word "our" implies either a corporate role account or a multiple user account, both of which are not allowed under Wikipedia policy. Please read WP:EL for more on what are and are not appropriate external links. I still believe that the link you added was not an appropriate external link. Mak (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. I typically use the word "our", however, I am the inventor of the technology. My information that is offered is both relevant and important. I assume you failied to notice that entire page is written to self promote the writer. It actually applies to an asepct of a technology (although what is offered is not new) that is used extensively overseas. I will appreciate your replacment of my links.

[edit] Deleted Links

Well, Mak, it looks like you are on a rampage of deleting links, but you'll have to admit that you are capable of making mistakes, and the kneejerk reaction that you made to the article I added was just such a mistake.

I take issue with your characterization of the expert articles which I referenced as "spam." I took care to isolate a specific article which is covered under the exception to Wikipedia policies regarding blog sites. It is a self-published work by an expert in his field of expertise. Frank Merriman is one of the few teachers left in the world carrying on the authentic art of Bel Canto singing and he comes from an authentic lineage traced back to the Bel Canto era. He is a full-time professori who has been teaching nothing but authentic Bel Canto for forty years. He is an expert teacher who has lectured internationally at arts conferences alongside such well-known figures as opera singer Renatta Scotto.

I did not link arbitrarily to a blog in general, but to a specific article. The article I linked to does not contain an invitation to engage in commerce in any way. It simply identifies the author and his professional reputation and experience.

I intend to do further work on these articles on Wikipedia, which are sloppy, poorly written and had very little in the way of reference material. They need work and I'm here to help! DismasMama 00:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I reviewed the above edit. Mak's position is pretty strong: The blog says "Santley wrote (in The Art of Singing):", so the reference should properly be to Santley's work. -- Paleorthid 17:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mak, sorry so long for a response. As to the word "rampage" please accept my apology if I offended-- I was actually chuckling as I wrote it because I had to try my edit at least three times before it got through. Other users were discussing with you the fact that you deleted links that they posted as well and I couldn't "Save Page" because of all the activity. I am glad you are not now saying that I was putting spam in the articles, because that was definitely not what I was doing. Also, I saw some articles in the area of singing that gave general blogsites as "External Links." Now, by that I mean that just a link to the ever-changing front page of someone's blog was given and not a specific article. I don't personally agree that a blog article is an automatically disqualified reference but I'm hesitant to get into the business of saying anything bad about any singing teacher. (I'm not a singing teacher, just for the record) I have found that 99-44/100% of them will say that any other teacher is completely unknowledgeable. Theres no end to it and no end to the territorialism. DismasMama 06:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mail

You have mail. BTW, if it came from a funny e-mail adress then just ignore and send to the usual one accessible from my userpage. I'm not quite sure what went on there. Tabs can be confusing. Cheers, Moreschi 20:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I've replied. Dang tabs :) Mak (talk)
Christ, have you seen the stuff I've just nominated for deletion. Check out my contribs. I would appreciate some help in making sure all the related subpages get stuffed in with the nominations. Cheers, Moreschi 22:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear, you might have an uphill battle on this one, and I'm not entirely sure it's going to be worth it. Visions of userboxes are now spinning through my brain. It's rather difficult to gain consensus on deleting things which "build community" in user or Wikipedia spaces, but I wish you luck. Mak (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
However, there is overwhelming consensus to delete the Esperanza duplicates of this stuff, if you check the MfD page. This is under the same rationale - in fact, it's worse, it's in PROJECT SPACE!! I'm optimistic. Your edit summary said it all, IMO. Cheers, Moreschi 23:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see the tides of consensus have changed while I was busy writing articles. Good! Mak (talk) 23:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the prefix link. Brilliant!! I had NO idea that existed. If we were in the same country, I'd kiss you for that. It will make my life a lot easier over the next few days. Thanks again. Moreschi 23:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)(so much for English stiff upper lip...)

[edit] Cesar Chavez

Hi, I am still new here. I saw you posted on my talk page, so I thought I would ask you. I made some edits on Cesar Chavez. I corrected some grammar errors, and made it a bit more precise. My edits have been reverted twice without a statement of cause. I can't fathom what the issue is. I even asked for the rational.Is there something I am doing wrong? Thanks. CraigMonroe 22:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I guess that must be it. I don't understand the issue. If you read through the article, it states he is a Mexican-American several times. Ce'st la vie.
I may try your approach, though after looking over the talk page, it seems as if two users are set in their ways and unwilling to attempt to reach consensus. I'm not sure it is worth the effort. Thanks again. I appreciate the help.CraigMonroe 22:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Answered on your talk. Mak (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again. I think the posters and I worked it out. If I have any questions in the future I will come to you. I appreciate the effort. CraigMonroe 18:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] That template

LOL, oh yes indeed ... "I'd be too tempted to use it," I believe was your comment. Btw have you ever really wanted to put {{subst:fucking idiot}} ~~~~ on a vandal's talk page? Except I fear that there might actually be such a template. Antandrus (talk) 04:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

lol, they should just make {{subst:fucking idiot}} come out the same as test 4. By the time it gets to test 4 I usually wish I had already blocked them and had it done with. Mak (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Super Request and Sarah Howells

I noticed you have deleted these two articles and blocked the author for spamming. As you may not be from Australia, I thought I should let you know that Triple J is a major national radio network here and these two shows/people are indeed notable - they are both linked from the Triple J article. The original format of the articles may have been poor, but I will clean these up in the next day or two.

I'm not sure what User:Bresaxs has done to warrant a block, but I haven't seen any other problematic contributions from him/her. -- Chuq 04:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem - will do. Regards -- Chuq 05:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome appreciated

Hi Mak;

Thanks for the warm welcome. I did take a quick look at your viol articles tonight. Nice work. I edited the main viol article a little tonight as well (I think it could use even more still).

I'm not familiar yet with the Etiquette here, if there is any, re discussing proposed edits before-hand on the given article's dedicated discussion page. I don't know how often the fairly regular contributors show up and check such things. I do have some issues and topics I'd like to discuss with those knowledgable. Will you, Mak, participate? (I hope so, having seen your work and knowing your interest).

I'll also have to figure out where, i.e. on who's talk page, to insert my replies. I see people are indenting, and thus threading in place, on a given single users talk page. I 'll guess I'll get the hang of it soon enough ;-)

Thanks again Cyclocifra 08:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, Cyclocifra, I hope you enjoy editing here. It depends on the editor, but many people check on articles they're interested in at least once a day, using their Wikipedia:Watchlist. Talk pages here aren't very well organized. I like to try to keep threads together, but then the other person doesn't get that lovely orange bar to let them know you've responded. When discussing specific issues in a specific article, I like to keep it on the article's talk page, since it will be easier for future editors or interested parties to find the discussion there.
Usually even fairly substantial edits on low-traffic pages don't need to be discussed ahead of time, but if you're reverted you should usually take the issue to the talk page of the article. I'd be happy to discuss things with you, you can just bring them up here or on your talk page, which I've watchlisted. Cheers, Mak (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the info Mak. Badagnani and I are now hashing out some things on the viol article's dedicated discussion page. I leaned how to indent as you can see ;-) , now I just have to remember to log in before editing.
One thing I hope to get to sometime is the San Giovanni altarpiece, Lorenza Costa (1497) image as being exemplary of early viols. A close look will reveal that those instruments are strung in 3 double courses! Body shape, depth, and neck-width are also red flags. They are "some" instrument "da gamba" but not viols. This one might be tough to challenge because the image is so part of the fabric by now. Some people might have built their reputations on that image, but maybe we can do it better. There are other far better early examples but copyright issues might be a problem.
Ok, see ya soon. Thanks Cyclocifra 08:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sweet FA

I've had a featured article on an obscure topic on the main page, too, so I know what you mean! I'll watch too :-) --RobertG ♬ talk 17:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Mak (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that, congrats! Wikimmortality beckons for you! I've already got it watchlisted. I'm going offline in a couple hours, but I'll keep an eye (or both, if I can spare them) for most of tomorrow GMT. I'm kind of tired; I spent most of today newpage patrolling - I had no idea before just how much junk people post. Then when the page you nominated for speedy deletion gets deleted, it vanishes from your contribs and edit count. Fmmt. Then you get the guys who won't let go and contest your prods and CSD notices and so we get 2 completely unnecessary AfDs (To peen and Madhumita datta) that add to the backlog. What a waste of time. Anyway, thanks again for pointing me in the direction of the prefix box: listing all the subpages at MFD took about a tenth of the time it would have done otherwise. Shall I ask Folantin and the rest of the crowd to keep an eye out as well? Cheers, Moreschi 21:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, newpages patrolling makes a lot more sense if you're already an admin, since you can just delete the articles, thus removing a step or two. RE:Concerto delle donne - I dunno, I don't want to spam people too much, use your judgement if you think people want to pitch in. I think a lot of admins just automatically watch the mainpage article, so hopefully it'll stand up alright. Tomorrow GMT is actually a perfect time to keep an eye out, since I think that's when I sleep :) (time zones confuse me). Cheers, Mak (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Newpage patrol is hard work, so thanks Moreschi, not nearly enough people do it. (Someone on AN/I famously described it as "being waist-deep in monkey vomit while dodging flung elephant dung", or something similar, I may be using more polite language than the original). I'll be watching CDD too until about 0600 UTC. Nice work Makemi; it's a great article on an interesting topic. Antandrus (talk) 21:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Lol!! Brilliant phrase - and perfectly accurate too. Black man's penis didn't last too long, though. Cheers, Moreschi 21:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, no, I mean, of course your work on NP Patrol is appreciated Moreschi, and useful, I just find that it's one of the few things that's a bit more satisfying once you can actually just delete the dreck. I was doing it last night, even though Lucky was deleting fast and furious, there were still waves and waves of things like "George smith is the best poopyhead there ever was. LOLOLOLO!!!!!1111eleventy-one!" etc. Mak (talk) 21:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Good point. Maybe I ought to think a bit more seriously about getting the buttons. Moreschi 21:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

There, that wasn't too traumatic, was it?! :-) By the way, I never congratulated you on the sheer quality of the article! Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 10:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Hm, you failed to include in your diff the edits which got on my nerves the most, plus the complete slap in the face on the talk page regarding references, but y'know, other than that, not too terrible. Thanks for helping out, and thanks for the congrats. Cheers, Mak (talk) 19:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Knowledge and belief

Thanks for the 'tweak' to Unification Church here. Being sure about something is not enough to get it listed as "fact" at Wikipedia. Good catch! ^_^ --Uncle Ed 18:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, those double edits which insert POV and then fix a typo can be tricky. Mak (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CDD

Fast work! you beat me to the rollback there. :) Antandrus (talk) 00:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The onslaught has begun! Mak (talk) 00:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Hope you have a good bottle of wine and a comfortable chair. ;-) Antandrus (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear, I'm already thinking the glass I have next to me isn't quite going to get me through. Mak (talk) 00:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
If you want, you might want to use my User:Makemi/Articles as an extra watchlist, since a lot of times people spread to related articles (I just saw one on Alfonso II d'Este). Mak (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Good point, thanks. I have a couple of giant watchlists in my user space too. Antandrus (talk) 00:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Weird, there were so many edits in like a minute, now there haven't been any in almost an hour. You just know as soon as those Australian school kids get going, it's going to be chaos, though. Mak (talk) 01:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No problem

No problem, there were lots of edits there and vandalism. Nice puppy pics. Gdo01 00:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] consort/concert

It may be 16th century italian, but in English "consort" means a spouse, which not only makes no sense in this context, but is not the meaning of the word "concerto" in Italian, no matter which century you are talking about!

Also, I note that the italian page reads "concerto delle dame", rather than "concerto delle donne". I don't know which is correct, but "dama" is properly translated "lady", whereas "donna" is properly translated "woman". There are other mis-translations in the article. Do you speak italian? I do!

If you want to respond, I am User talk:Esb, but I don't check it very often. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.171.10.147 (talk • contribs).

If you follow the link, you'll see that consort can also refer to a consort of instruments, or a musical group of evenly matched forces. There were a number of names given to the group, since 16th century Italian was far from standardized. Either is correct, since both were used to refer to them. I've studied Italian, and I also paid careful attention to my sources, which were written by people who know a lot of both modern and 16th century Italian. Mak (talk) 02:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I think your comments about 16th century italian refer to "concerto delle donne" vs. "concerto delle dame" (and to how to translate "donna"), and that's fine. I am aware that the meaning of "donna" varies in Italian both regionally and through time.

Having read the entry about "consort" more carefully, I agree with your statement about "concert"/"consort". Not being as knowledgeable about music as you are, to me "concerto" simply translates as "concert", but obviously "consort of instruments" is more specific and appropriate. So I thank you for teaching me something new.

I could maybe suggest that this page be made more accessible to others who might also not be very knowledgeable about music, and include the word "concert" in the first paragraph, as an alternative to "consort of instruments" (i.e. provide both words as possible translations). But at this point I'm going to leave it up to you, as you seem quite sufficiently knowledgeable and devoted to this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Esb (talk • contribs).

Well, concert usually means a single performance to most people, even those who are musically trained, although it can technically also mean a group of performers. I'll think about it, you might be right. Mak (talk) 02:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Esb 02:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Whoops

I didn't check the time of your first warning and assumed he'd vandalised the article earlier. Whoops!! Just off to chip in at Agrippina. It is getting not a little ridiculous. BTW, have you seen my latest vandal-reverting edit summary? The unkindest cut of all... Cheers, Moreschi 18:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Salmon Brothers Band

Hello, im new to wikipedia and i wanted to make an article about htis new band. I had a hard time figuring out how to make one, and wheni was finaly getting the hang of it you deleted it. Im sure you had a good reason, but i would apreciate it if you could mabye, undelete it? If there was something wrong with it tell me so i could fix it. Sausage Mohoni —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sausage Mohoni (talk • contribs).

I will put it on your userpage. It was deleted because it did not assert notability for the band. In fact, it says they haven't even released a single CD. See WP:MUSIC for guidelines about band articles. Generally, garage bands or their equivalents are not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Thanks, Mak (talk) 22:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Passion revisions

I am working on a major revision of the Passion section, which strikes me as anemics and eccentric. Having set the entire text as an oratorio I think I can objectively summarize it. I am puzzled why you deleted the external reference as promotional. If I had written up my work in the music section, I would agree. But in fact my site has the only Gospel parallels on the wed (that I know of), the the reference takes you directly to the text. So what is the problem? You are denying Mikipedia readers a unique and useful resource. Scott King (e-mail redacted so as to reduce spammage) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scott R King (talk • contribs).

I've responded on User talk:Scott R King. Mak (talk) 22:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the vanity conflict reference. I will try to find another web site with the passion gospel parallels. Scott King —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scott R King (talk • contribs).

No problem. If you place ~~~~ after your post, it will automatically link to your userpage and give the time and date of your post when you save. Thanks, Mak (talk) 22:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concerto delle donne watch

No problem. Although if you don't mind me saying, I was deeply distressed you failed to include any Azerbaidjani sources in your article.(Ducks..!) --Folantin 08:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Diito. Always nice to have something to do. Sources - yeah, people should actually bother to check what the hell they're talking about before the post. One book (only scholarship available) and one website - and that website is Grove...Christ. Oh well, lots of women in the "Reference" section, but no Azerbaidjaini sources, and nothing from our favourite music publishing company, and no Chinese sources either, so I am afraid the only solution is to delete the article and hang, draw, and quarter everyone who worked on it. Moreschi 14:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Ech, and even though those are the main sources, there are other sources given which support the main assertions. I'm personally distressed that no First Nations sources were given, but such was my lot. Mak (talk) 16:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and you have some profanely exasperated mail. Moreschi 16:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
And more, though none of it profane this time round. Moreschi 20:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pi and pie

Very amusing indeed… thanks for reverting it - I've only just noticed! Strangely enough, I do like pi and pie! The user in question was probably disgruntled that I had reverted his posting of 100,000 digits of pi. :-) --RobertG ♬ talk 17:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Albert

Thanks for the additions to the article! (To think this one was up for speedy deletion an hour and a half ago!) --Fang Aili talk 20:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect

Thanks for the note. I'll try to be more careful in future. Doom-chronicle 00:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block summaries

We need a place to put all the block summaries we "really wish we could have typed" but didn't (e.g. [5]). LOL.... Antandrus (talk) 00:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mail

You've got some. Cheers, Moreschi 19:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leçons de tenebres (Couperin)

Okie, article's up. ~Kylu (u|t) 22:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your note

Thanks for your 'welcome back'. I am not really 'back' as i am trying to concentrate on my (very basic) French. (In any case I don't have my Grove here and I don't like to contribute without having it to hand.)

I saw a little of the problem you encountered before. I am rather glad I didn't get involved as it was obviously extraordinarily time-consuming refuting negative accusations. Was there any resolution? Of course if the project needs an extra vote/support at any juncture I will be delighted to offer it.

Best from Annecy

Kleinzach 17:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hmmm

.... Talk:Frédéric_Chopin#The_First_Recording_Ever ?? Antandrus (talk) 23:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just reading that, I'm pretty skeptical. I could always be convinced, but I'd need to see something a bit more solid. Mak (talk) 23:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delete dreck

Oh for crying out loud. Wikipedia:Hangman. This is the second time it's been recreated. Please delete when you see this, I'm getting seriously cheesed off. Cheers, from an exasperated Moreschi 20:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Aw, Cowman beat me to it. Mak (talk) 20:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Great, but may I humbly suggest that someone keep an eye on this? One more recreation and it would probably be best to salt the earth and kill off all the nonsense. What is this, gamers not letting go? I don't get it...Moreschi 20:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Sure, my eye is peeled. But for a partial reason for the recreations, you might want to check out Special:Whatlinkshere/Wikipedia:Hangman. Mak (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
WikiCouch. Maybe my sense of humour is severely dysfunctional, but I still can't stop grinning. I really can't. I liked the Supernanny comment, by the way. Cheers, Moreschi 21:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh wow, that page almost made me throw up. It's like a really bad attempt at humour, only the author clearly takes it seriously. I'm also seriously concerned that he thinks the "naughty" side of the couch is going to help anyone at all. It's not. It never has and it never will. Oh. Dear. At least it's on its way out. Mak (talk) 22:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
But Christ, check out the latest version: Wikipedia:The WikiCouch. And the page history, 2 edit summaries down. Awww. Now we're all meant to feel bad because you're stressed. Sorry, but I don't buy it. We'd probably have deserved infefblocks if we'd referred Boisseau to this, seriously. Sending someone to sit on the bad side of the Couch...I mean, that smashes WP:CIVIL into tiny pieces. Best, Moreschi 22:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Write it in bold and stick it up there. That MFD has turned into a huge circus, so no one will notice anyway. Truth be told, I've thought it myself more than once...basically, why should I care about your Wikistress? Cheers, Moreschi 23:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Great, thanks a lot. Cheers, Moreschi 10:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monody

Monody! I'm impressed. That's fun. Wish I could have heard it!

Stuff going on in NYC ... wish I could be there. There's an exhibition at the Marlborough I want to see, and now I hear there's a meetup. Sigh. :) Antandrus (talk) 04:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYC Meetup

I'm looking forward to meeting you. It is more likely now that I will be there. -- Ssilvers 00:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minor amusements

I love the timestamp of this edit: [6]. Methinks Cage would have been amused. Antandrus (talk) 22:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's pretty good :) Now I'm going to go listen to some Victoria. I hope it's good. It's going to be the Requiem for 6 voices, which, IIRC, I've performed before. Which is sometimes good, because you can follow what's going on better, and is sometimes bad, because you notice all the mistakes and everything you would have done differently. Cheers, Mak (talk) 22:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Agrippina (opera)

Does the cast list look alright to you? I'm kind of embarrassed how I fixed it, but, well, sometimes, lateral thinking works. Adam Cuerden talk 03:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Garrou's Law

Just letting you know that someone recreated it. Gzkn 07:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism at W.S. Gilbert

Please block. Moreschi 21:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Kind of funny though. Clearly a deplorable failure of intellect that I failed to spot the obvious cannibalistic subtext to G+S. Thanks for the block. Cheers, Moreschi 22:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jean-Thierry Boisseau

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

Jean-Thierry Boisseau and other users affiliated with Musik Fabrik are banned from editing any article dealing with artists or projects listed in their sales catalog. Further, they may not add any such artist or project to any article. There is no restriction on making suggestions or participating in discussions on talk pages. Jean-Thierry Boisseau is placed on probation. He may be banned from any article or talk page which he disrupts. Any bans imposed under this decision may be enforced by blocking the offender for a period of up to a week. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Jean-Thierry_Boisseau#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 06:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I listened to your beautiful cantata (sorry I don't remember the name of it). Where did you graduate & did you have a minor or did you honor?100110100 03:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I assume you mean the "Dialogus inter Christum et fidelem animam" - Wo ist doch mein freund geblieben? which has a ridiculously long title? Music was my major, as we call them in the U.S. I went to the Jacobs School of Music, which at the time was called Indiana University School of Music. Mak (talk) 03:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it was the German cantat, but Dialogus inter Christum et fidelem animam? I listened to Wo ist doch mein freund geblieben. We have majors too..... but we also have the option to honor, but when we major in something we have to minor. Or do a double major....... Thanks. Well I'll ttyl!100110100 04:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Dialogus etc. basically means "Dialogue between Christ and a friendly spirit"(ish), and the beginning text is "Wo ist doch" (wherefore is...). Mak (talk) 04:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, cool thanks! So I looked up the universität you graduated from, aber it doesn't mention the degree you have.100110100 04:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The Wiki article doesn't list all the majors and programs at the school. For instance, it seems to have left out the double degree in carillon and Dutch. See [7] for my program. Mak (talk) 04:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hkelkar Arbitration

Your response here would be appreciated in the context of this proposal on the arbitration case. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 15:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I also suggest you read this comment on the matter made by a user with a more scholarly background (and I am getting more refs).Hkelkar 15:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Style

Whoops, that's not intentional, that's just me messing up and being lazy/an idiot. I'll fix it later on today when I've got more time: currently busy. Thanks for the note and telling me about what MOS says. Cheers, Moreschi 18:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Fruity? My Britannica is very, very prudish. It describes Peter Pears as Britten's "lifelong friend and artistic partner" - somewhat more than that, methinks. Hmmm. Anyway, IMO bawdy works but erotic is just more...formal. Better, somehow. BTW, were you actually able to keep a straight face during that song? The tone painting on "but a little higher"...hilarious. No wonder the audience started laughing - great musical entertainment. Cheers, Moreschi 21:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The thing with bawdy is that it has this slangy connotation to it - at least on this side of the Atlantic. Weird argument, maybe that's why I think non-encyclopaedic. Cheers, Moreschi 21:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. I think you win this one - I'm hardly going to edit-war - which must go down in history as one of the weirdest wikiarguments ever. One or two more things, though. First, checking "erotic" up in the dictionary - this is getting sad - I get "of or concerning sexual desire" - which works. Checking up "bawdy" I find that it's secondary meaning has a connotation of obscenity. Is the song obscene? Weel, maybe. It certainly isn't scatalogical. Both work, but I still think "erotic" is slightly preferable. But hey, it's your sound clip! Re the convoluted wording of the Grove Britten - all I can say is WTF??? Cheers, Moreschi 21:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
We seriously need mediation here:)) Maybe you could argue that while "breasts" (plural) would be obscene, the singular form usually isn't interpreted as such, or even as sexual (though it obviously is in this context). And for the record, I think that it is excellently sung. Cheers, Moreschi 21:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Weeeeeeelllll, I was more thinking that the song clearly is not talking about emotional love (carried in the heart and/or breast) or intellectual love (in the head), or... foot-love (in the foot), but is rather saying that the place of cupids fire is in the, ah'em, vagina, which may or may not be considered obscene, depending. Mak (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it's a pity I'm not an admin. Then we could wheel war, and that would be REALLY fun. I checked out the Wiktionary dicdefs again: hmmm. The song isn't really "filthy", nor so "rude" as to be considered unacceptable. Naughty but nice. And implication isn't really obscene, is it??? Help, mediators, please!!:)) Cheers, Moreschi 22:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Ooooh, wheel warring, we could even block each other for breaking the 3rr, and then protect the page! Awesome. I wish I had a real microphone, so I could record new stuff :'( Maybe I'll get one (or buy myself one) for my birthday. Mak (talk) 22:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Ooooh... heard the word "breast", well, that's um, getting there. Pretty singing! I guess I'm going to have to be Solomonic here and proclaim that it is both erotic and bawdy. Perhaps the individual perception may vary depending on time, place, and level of inebriety (gad, I'm talking like a politician). I'd also suggest "suggestive". :) Well it's been a heck of a weekend here. I've even been trolled by User:Lir ([8] -- Moreschi, that's who that was) -- who called me "illiterate" and gave me my best laughing spell in a while. Heck, maybe he's right. But I'm getting off track. That's a beautiful upload. :) Antandrus (talk) 05:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Just in case you wanted another view:-) To the innocent, everything is pure? If there's a spectrum with bawdy at one end, then I think this is at completely the other end! A bawd is a madam (in that sense). To me, "bawdy" must be boisterous, and leave no room for an "innocent" interpretation; it calls to mind something much more earthy like Fanny Hill or Chaucer's Miller's Tale. I wouldn't let any seven-year-olds in my charge read those! However, an "innocent" interpretation of the words of this song is possible (although I don't think it would mean much) and erotic reference, while certainly the song's intention, is cleverly oblique. It would take a pretty precocious seven-year-old to recognise it. Strictly speaking any bawdiness here is thus a matter of interpretation (and thus WP:OR unless there's a reference): I think double entendre is a less questionable classification. By the way, at least two of Schoenberg's three cabaret songs on Hyperion CDA66289 (Blah Blah Blah and other trifles) are almost exactly analagous fun. I also agree with the others, Makemi, that it's very beautifully done! --RobertG ♬ talk 11:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, "bawdy" means Restoration comedy to me. The Campion is more subtle. "Sly" is the word I'd use. --Folantin 12:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the mediation, guys - just had to tear us apart there:)) Anyway, how about "Sexually suggestive" - I think that is a good synthesis of what others have thought, and works well itself. Cheers, Moreschi 21:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Shall we have a straw poll on it? Mak (talk) 21:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Mmm, "sexually suggestive" sounds good. (Oops, didn't mean it to sound "quite" that way... :) ) Antandrus (talk) 21:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Lol: have you seen my latest edit summary on Agrippina? Re the sound clip ref - hey, you could call that POV without a cite...Cheers, Moreschi 22:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
My record hasn't got the spoken text - probably a bad thing, but still great fun. "Taken from the county jail" is just running past my ears"...hilarious. Cheers, Moreschi 22:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Does a sexually suggestive straw poll involve rolling in the hay? --RobertG ♬ talk 10:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Probably so, but people tend to cast baleful looks if you conduct them in public. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 07:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] regarding Talk:Indian caste system

I think Makemi is sufferring from a misconception. The Political theory book was not just the original fatwa. It was the fatwa+scholarly analysis of the same published in contemporary times:
The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate (Including a Translation of Ziauddin Barani's "Fatawa-i Jahandari," circa 1358-9 A.D.), trans. Mohammad Habib and Afsar Umar Salim Khan (Allahabad: Kitab Mahal, n.d.), 67.
It is cited in this paper (among others) hope you have access to MUSE. So yes, it is peer-reviewed.Hkelkar 00:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the paper's findings are irrelevant to your argument. BhaiSaab talk 01:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Please don't move your argument onto my talk page. Thanks, Mak (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] monobook

Jajaja, I got used to write Usuario, sorry :P. Thanks! bye.. Equi 21:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] monobook

Jajaja, I got used to write Usuario, sorry :P. Thanks! bye.. Equi 21:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I was wondering if you could delete the page (user:Equi/monobook.js). I'm having technical problems with the monoboook. Equi 21:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks --Equi 21:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vey, Oy (1549-2006)

Indeed. Was he on any of the lists? (Moniuszko, not Vey) Antandrus (talk) 02:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I've been eavesdropping again (that's a lasting result of the brouhaha involving 'E 'Oo Cannot Be Named). No, unfortunately Moniuszko didn't make the final cut. This shouldn't be a problem. If it is, leave it to me.--Folantin 10:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trobairitz

Very nice! Quite a pleasure to hear first thing in the morning here at work (where I have a new computer, which didn't even require any configuring to get the file to play). Unambiguous D Dorian; I would have used it as an example if I were still teaching ear training. Beautifully done! :) Antandrus (talk) 15:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Progressive Notation Method

This is a viable and accredited method used by many people. It is simply a faster way to read and play music. Virtually every guitar player uses this method, they just dont know what to call it. Now they do. The reason I can't cite sources is because this has never been documented before, which was the reason to write the article in the first place. I am new to Wikipedia and would not like my first experience to be a negative one. Please, remove the deletion notice from my article. I will attempt to do some work on it to make it more....whatever you want MY article to be, but until then please remove the deletion notice. Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cptkrod (talk • contribs).

I don't wish to make your first experience with Wikipedia a negative one; however, Wikipedia has guidelines and policies in place which serve to try to make this a better Encyclopedia. One of these is Original research - original research is not allowed on Wikipedia, so if it hasn't been published before by reputable sources, it's not allowed. Also, see WP:OWN - we do not own the articles we write and edit on Wikipedia. By hitting the "Save page" button, you are agreeing to license your contributions under the GFDL. It also says "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." This includes deletion, if that's appropriate. Mak (talk) 16:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Yep, OR is not permitted. Nor, as a general rule, is stuff that gets 2 Ghits. Just for further reference, and enjoy Wikipedia! Cheers, Moreschi 16:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
For those of you playing at home, this article is now on AfD. Mak (talk) 23:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hyphens and –

I'm fairly sure that between dates in the first paragraph, – is in fact what is wanted, but I will admit I haven't kept up with recent changes in the MoS and discussion thereof. I'll check.

Ah. Was used to having my own hyphens corrected but here are the rules:

Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers) (Dates of birth and death section, can't seem to get the anchor working right- maybe it's this browser)

and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dashes)

From the latter, seems clear it's a preference, not a rule. It is a range of dates in the sense of the former, from the examples given, though- from time of birth to time of death. Not definite enough but that's what I was basing that on. Schissel | Sound the Note! 15:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok- it looked like a hyphen, not an n-dash, to me. Thanks. Anything about my contention that she may not have been the person for whom the B-flat concerto was written, that is, that Leopold's concerto is typically misinterpreted? Schissel | Sound the Note! 15:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

You too, thanks! As I understand it, Girdlestone's disagreement (in which he quotes an article by someone- I don't have my copy here- devoted to the issue- but this was decades ago, and modern scholarship may have a more certain opinion) was:

  • was the piano concerto he wrote for her ever played by her (in Paris, or otherwise) ("nach Paris" is ambiguous)
  • was the concerto no. 18 in B-flat or no. 19 in F (this in part a stylistic question- Mozart's concertos for others differed in some respects from his concertos meant for himself, especially at that time- but not I think entirely so.) But yes, the letter agrees that he did write a concerto for her, and as the only evidence we have one way or another... so yes, far as that's concerned I am making of a molehill a mountain. Though I am curious still who gave each concerto its contemporary- and its modern- premiere. And its recording premieres, too (which is why that early- 1935- recording of 22 by Edwin Fischer together with other Mozart concertos and piano works, including one probably not by Mozart, interests me.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 16:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted My Page

I just made my first article- about Neil Kumar, who was the first famous person I discovered not to already be on Wikipedia. Why did you delete it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Banana Peel Neil (talk • contribs).

[edit] Notability?

I don't know what you mean by Notability. If you are asking whether he is well-known or just a student, the answer is he is both. Although he is still a High School senior, he is the most prominent musical performer and composer of the region along with his band, Banana Peel —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Banana Peel Neil (talk • contribs).

[edit] Why?

Did you delete the page, I was making. I wasn't even finished, I just started really. Then BAM, gone. It is based on a real person, oh which I don't think you will ever see another person with that name. -I edited it out, because I understand why you did so. I forgot my log in, so I can't sign back onto that name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lolzibefixin (talk • contribs).

I deleted the page because it was utter nonsense. Mak (talk) 03:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea how to send you a simple message, so I'll just edit this page and write it here: Mak, So you delete that person's nonsense, but when i delete some nonsense i saw when someone put a section entitled "jose (or whatever his name was) was here" you deny my editing and put it back. Why is that Mak?

[edit] Birthday

Hi Makemi,

Thanks for your edits to the article on Anne Boyd, and thank you especially for catching the error in her birth date; a career vandal seems to have been maliciously editing her birth date at random. Hope to see you around more Australian music articles! Ckerr 14:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FrostShot

Hi, How can the description of this product be allowed on your page, it is not for advestrisement purposes it is actually a new invention, I am trying to describe it the best I can without it sounding like advertisement. It is'nt even being sold in the U.S it is only currently available in the chinese market, this is where I first saw it, I just want to share my info with the rest of the world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frostshot (talk • contribs).

The fact that your username is Frostshot makes it seem like you have a vested interest in this product, and the description you wrote and the images you uploaded seem like advertising copy, which is a speedy deletion criteria. When I googled the product, I got a myspace page and a whole bunch of pages about some World of Warcraft player. This doesn't make the product seem particularly notable. If you could write about the product in a disinterested way, which is difficult when something is your own invention, and give verifiable sources to non-trivial coverage of the product, then it could perhaps be included, but I suspect that is not possible for this product. Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue to advertise things no one has heard of before (or anything else, for that matter). Mak (talk) 15:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Random

Hi. User: Makemi.Jjjhjhjjhmkxzd;ds 16:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFD

Thank you. I have never had an AFD before and was not entirely sure what to do. I am very well acqainted with this "curse" and know that it is true. I only ask that you allow me time to find sources over the Internet. Can I submit non-Internet sources, or do those not count?

P.S. I understand that Wikipedia has a vandal problem. For that reason I ask you to please review my contributions, all of which have been made in good faith; I would not submit information I knew to be false. If you can help me in locating sources (likely on the individual cases), I would be very grateful.

SwedishConqueror 21:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)SwedishConqueror

Not my family (thankfully). I know of the case because I am Swedish in ancestry (see my user page), and the Madsens were a very prominent (and extremely wealthy) half-Danish, half-Swedish clan. I think the fact of their wealth and glamor is what made the incidents so compelling, but that's just me.

In Sweden and Denmark, the Madsens are still quite powerful.

SwedishConqueror 21:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)SwedishConqueror

[edit] What the heck?!?

That is a funny edit summary. I'll have to remember it. ;) —  $PЯINGrαgђ  Always loyal! 05:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I just get a little annoyed when I have to go to Grove to find out that someone was just messing with the page. I'd rather they'd just add PENIS and get on with it. Mak (talk) 05:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Amen!!! and something about a kitten too. Cracked me up. Antandrus (talk) 05:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
It was pretty funny…I also like that question on WP:HOLIC that says something like "Are you totally unfazed by words like "penis", "poop", "crap", etc. because you see them all the time in vandalised pages?" I answered "yes".

—  $PЯINGrαgђ  Always loyal! 05:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what?

it's a little bit rich? of what? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MRGQ (talk • contribs).

First of all, please put new comments at the bottom of the page, secondly, please sign you posts with ~~~~. I believe I was referring to this edit, where you seem to be insisting on your image, possibly fairly (I'm a big fan of cutting down on unnecessary fair-use on WP), however for some reason you keep getting orphan-bot notices on your page. There has been a certain amount of support for blocking users who persist in mist-tagging images. I have no clue why it bothered me enough to mention at the time, though, since it was almost three months ago. Mak (talk) 03:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Agrippina

Heh. In all honesty, I hadn't seen it until you pointed it out, which makes it hard to get upset =) Adam Cuerden talk 10:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help and the congrats. Cheers, Moreschi 21:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recording

I've commented on Antandrus's talk. Yeah, I've heard the Trobairitz one and it's fantastic. Lovely music as well. BTW, I could be imagining it, but it almost sounds as if your voice has...well...grown. The sound just sounds a bit fuller - in fact, definitely so - than it does on the Buxtehude - which was from earlier, right? More mature. Please ignore me completely if I'm talking complete bollocks. Cheers, Moreschi 15:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks on the trob. one. I think my voice has grown a bit, due to a number of factors. Different voice teacher, different surroundings, plus I'm a bit older. The Buxtehude one was recorded about a year and a half ago. Mak (talk) 22:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FrostShots

Hello, If you look Frostshots up in plural on google or yahoo, you will see a couple of newspapers articles including one from the Miami Herald calling it one of the best ideas of the year. I created the name FrostShot because it was the first time I had used wikipedia and I thought creating an ID was the same as creating an article. I hope you reconsider reposting the unbias definition of this new product. Thank you and best regards.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frostshot (talk • contribs).

By all means please check the search results. There are 5 unique results, and the Miami Herald is the only one relevant to this product, and it's just a one-line reference in a hodge-podge article about Marketing ideas. Clearly this is not a notable product, hardly even launched yet, and this article is an attempt to try to promote it. Fan-1967 20:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, this item seems to be completely non-notable, and the article you created was written like an advertisement. I don't think one source where it's mentioned in a list of inventions makes it notable or well-referenced. I am not, of course, the final word on such matters, but I don't think it will be worth your time to try to get this particular article included. Also, you are welcome to write other articles. Mak (talk) 20:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glitch?

I have no idea how to send you a simple message, so I'll just edit this page and write it here: Mak, So you delete that person's nonsense, but when i delete some nonsense i saw when someone put a section entitled "jose (or whatever his name was) was here" you deny my editing and put it back. Why is that Mak? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.197.80.39 (talk • contribs).

In this edit someone at your IP address removed the references of an article. There was recently some sort of widespread glitch, though, so if you didn't do that, it could have been the glitch. Mak (talk) 01:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
My edit on the opera project looks like a glitch too... Adam Cuerden talk 05:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh. Seriously, Mak, you're beating yourself up over nothing. It's alright =) Adam Cuerden talk 06:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Had a listen

I think it sounded very nice. The shifting worked well. I didn't notice any pitch problems but I have no ear for that. ++Lar: t/c 14:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The other opera list

Unfortunately, I don't have access to Grove, nor am I likely to in the near future, so I don't have a clue about the number of works that would be involved. But it might be worth experimenting with the idea if you think it's viable. Maybe we should try doing the method you suggest and the other method (i.e. the ten lists) simultaneously to see what they turn out like. I think a few user sandboxes are in order so we can see what the completed page(s) would look like before we make our choice. As I've said to Moreschi, this is a project for the medium- to long-term and now that our helpful anti-sexist friend has sadly disappeared, we don't have to rush this list. I just thought we'd better show that we had plans for it in case another overenthusiastic deletionist put it up for the chop. Cheers. --Folantin 17:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Air à boire

Nice work!! We need a bunch of work on French music of the 17th century.

I'm listening to Josquin's Missa La sol fa re mi (based on the guy who told him "get lost!" -- "lascia fare mi!") and thinking about writing articles on all these masses ... the masses never understand the masses of work to be done on masses, alas, but lesse faire a moi. :) Antandrus (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a whole bunch of music that contains jokes using solfege syllables. I wonder if there's a name for that, or a possible article. My program did a concert in conjunction with a musicology conference on erotic music, and a bunch of the pieces had dirty jokes using solfege. Mak (talk) 18:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Yup, it's called soggetto cavato (will that light up blue? I think so) Antandrus (talk) 18:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey!

How are you doing? Just wondering how I can Become a newpage patroller. Or anything else.

Lazylaces 20:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You!

Thanks for the info, and cute dogs ;-) aww..

Lazylaces 20:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Lazylaces

OK, I sometimes make mistakes (and it was only a 24-hour block)-looks as if someone's unblocked anyway - sorry, jimfbleak 06:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need Help

Do you mind helping me with a small problem? Today, I was working on the article for Bessie Smith. I added a musical artist box and then I noticed that there was information posted on the article more than once. Therefore, I went to delete the repeated information and then, when I saved the page, the enire aricle's information deleted. What should I do? Please respond back to me as soon as possible! Also make sure you look at the Bessie Smith article. Thanks. LovePatsyCline 21:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Reverted to previous version. Fan-1967 21:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ok

I can edit now, thanks ;-) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lazylaces (talk • contribs) 20:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the information! I'm so glad you helped me out along with the other user. I will be sure to use that next time! LovePatsyCline 21:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2 questions

1. How do I create a userbox? 2. How do I create a signature? thanks! Lazylaces 03:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Giammateo

Sorry... I was not here, or your message went confused with other new edits to my talk. As for "Giammateo", is totally archaic... Of course, if you google, you'll find only the old Anglicized version. But, believe me, it sounds truly bad. Nobody in Italy call him in this way, and, being him Italian, I think we should keep it. Let me know and good work! --Attilios 18:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC) (PS: a note... using Google as measure of reliability is not always the best practice. For example, a dispute about the use of Giovanni da Verrazzano or Verrazano, in the end favoured the first one as, despite google telling the opposite, more prestigious English sources also cited him with that name (namely, Britannica). Bye again.)

Mhmh... what you wrote is reasonably and not. The problem is that the name is probably have been written wrong, or Anglicized, since the very beginning, I seem, as "Giammateo" sounds a fairly odd Italian also for 16th century matters. I have no problems to have a "Raphael" or a "Christopher Columbus" here, but "Giammateo" is, for me, neither English nor Italian. Thus I'd prefer to remain to the most secure spelling, the one confirmed by modern Italian sources, if you agree. Bye. --Attilios 20:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Birthday!

Great! If I think of anything, I'll let you know. Now, if you had a slave continuo player I could really give you stuff to sing...Cheers, Moreschi 19:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and please see the last 2 edits at Concerto delle donne. I stuck the thing down in a footnote (the grammar just did not work) but you know more about that article than I do. Cheers, Moreschi 20:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks :) Yes, a continuo slave would be nice :) I've reverted the addition to "Concerto delle donne", as according to all of my sources it is not correct. The problem is that the Italian article has a different name, so... people seem to have a problem with that, since the group is Italian. It's been discussed before, I believe on the peer review, if anyone wishes to look up the arguments. Mak (talk) 21:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly. BTW, one thing you could do...maybe...is "Ho un non so che" for Agrippina, La Resurrezione (today's new article), and Il pastor fido. If you find even a shite keyboard player. The thing is that the only accompaniment is the violins, in unison, doubling exactly with the voice, plus a couple incredibly brief ritornellos. Your sort of range and weight as well. Something to think about longer-term, maybe. Cheers, Moreschi 21:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Hm, I'll try to find a score for that, I'd like to do a nice bit of Handel about now. If you run into a score, let me know. I could maybe play the keyboard part on my shite midi keyboard, but it'd be difficult. The touch on it is decidedly not like a harpsichord, which is the only keyboard instrument I've really played semi-seriously. Mak (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I-D I made a userbox! And signature!

Look for the user box on my page at the bottom (the bush one) And Here is my sigunature! Talk- Helping Wikipedians since.. um.. for almost a year! 22:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Virgin Killer

Thanks for the reply. Sure any administrator can do the undeleting, not to mention that it is quite easy to re-upload it, but I don't see why you couldn't self-revert, considering there was a consensus on talk page. I prefer try to solve things on user talk first. The administrator who uploaded the image is currently running for ArbCom, so I'd rather not bother him as he is obviously busy. Thanks, Prolog 13:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Quintana

He's ba-a-a-a-ack. Looks like unprotecting was premature. Fan-1967 14:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

(...and it looks like the related edit wars on Pedro Zamora and Judd Winickhave resumed.) Fan-1967 14:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Looks like the individual responsible (most recently using the name Daphnaz (talk • contribs)) is also consistently 65.241.54.187 (talk • contribs), currently on a 24-hour block, but probably bears watching when the block expires. Fan-1967 14:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A couple of things

Now where was I? Oh, yes, there's still one ugly fact tag on Venus and Adonis (opera). I don't suppose you've got a cite for that? I also remember sticking a hidden note into Orpheus Britannicus. Not that I can remember what I said, but I do remember that it was interesting/important.

Something I thought of the other day that it might be nice to a big concerto-delle-donne-style project on is Consort of instruments? Lengthy article in Grove gets virtually nothing here. Something to think about, maybe.

Oh, and if you want to see something reasonably amusing, check out Gaetano Guadagni. Make sure you read it all the way through. Cheers, Moreschi 16:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

lol, your edit summaries crack me up. I'll respond more fully later, right now I have to go do a concert of some Wert madrigals and a bit of monody. Cheers, Mak (talk) 16:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, which edit summaries were these? Moreschi 14:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Let's see... this one, this one, I feel like there were more, but now I can't find them. Maybe "Teh Cabal" has oversighted them! On your other questions - Hopefully fixed Venus and Adonis, frankly I can't remember where I got some of that stuff (I wrote it quite a while ago, I wonder if I used another source and evilly didn't cite it, it was back in the day when such things weren't such sacrilege.) Oh yeah this one was pretty funny. Hm, Consort of instruments, you say? Could make something of it, especially if you go thoroughly into the history, all the different areas they flourished, and talk about repertoire. Now, frankly, from the Gaetano article, I'm not entirely sure what "immediately turned up that part, which in England is accustomed to be flogged to, but in its own country has a different entertainment - which he accordingly gave it." means. I probably don't want to know, but still, it's not entirely clear. That might be for the best, but if I don't get it entirely, you can bet that your average reader won't get it. Cheers, Mak (talk) 15:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I've tried to clarify - now I'm waiting for some over-eager RC patroller to revert me. It needs rephrasing, methinks. I removed one unsourced statement from Venus and Adonis: that's got rid of the fact tags, and it wasn't really relevant anyway. I came across that anecdote from something I found at the Handel House, and thought it was so wondeful it just HAD to go into the article. Cheers, Moreschi 15:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting the Netezza page

I wrote the new page after the original one was deleted. I have no affiliation with the company other than as a user of the product.

The article should have met NPOV standards.

Notable company requirements:

* ISBN 0976830299
* http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/03/netezza_annual_conference_roundup/

Many database related pages on Wikipedia link to that article.

Compare to the Bizgres article.

Electrum 15:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

After looking into it further, I've undeleted it. Mak (talk) 01:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pastoral opera and new project box etc.

Hi. Someone has started a new opera category called 'pastoral opera' to include some very early works. Is it viable in your opinion? Also we have a new 'Work in progress' (provisional title) box at the top of the Opera Project page amd it would be good to have your input. Best. Kleinzach 21:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think "pastoral opera" is as valid a genre as many, it's a term which Grove uses, as well as Pastorale-Héroïque. It seems to be closely related to early pastoral dramas, making it appropriate for early works. It would be nice, however, if the category page gave a better (or any) definition of a pastoral(e) opera. I'll check out the Opera project page and see if I have anything to say. Mak (talk) 01:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Good, then I suppose the next question is whether the best name for the genre is 'pastoral opera' or 'Pastorale-Héroïque' (or something else). We have generally been using the French/German/Italian or whatever terms because they are better defined, and we have had a lot of the vague English cats deleted. (The job is not finished of course.) - Kleinzach 13:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind me butting in here. Funnily enough, I've just been writing a bit about the 'Pastorale-Héroïque' in my revision of the main "French opera" article (click on the link on my user page to access). I think it deserves its own sub-article. IIRC Wikipedia France has a stubby page on the subject. It might be worth putting it under the heading "Pastoral opera" though. What else would go there, Handel's Acis and Galatea for example? Cheers. --Folantin 13:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, I've created a stub for pastorale héroique. It can be merged with pastoral opera if necessary. --Folantin 14:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, I'm always happy to have people butt in with intelligent comments :) 'Pastorale-Héroïque', however, is not the same as pastoral opera. The former is later and only French, whereas the latter is earlier and can apply to more areas. Perhaps that's the next article I should write. Acis and Galatea should probably be pastorale, rather than 'Pastorale-Héroïque', right? I'll double check all this later. Cheers, Mak (talk) 16:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, P.H. is purely a French Baroque genre. The article I've created deals solely with that area. I thought it would be a good idea to have something like this ready for January when Rameau is Opera Composer of the Month too. He wrote one or two of the things. I just wondered whether it was worth having an umbrella article called "pastoral opera". I'm inclined to think maybe not. --Folantin 17:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I defer to you both on this subject. Having been working for some time on genre categories, my only interest is in having clear (rather than catch-all) categories which relate to style rather than just content. Perhaps it would be a good idea to talk to User:LiniShu and bring him on board. I also wonder whether we should copy this correspondence on to the Opera project talk page. - Kleinzach 18:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I'm not entirely sure what he or she means by "pastoral opera". So far, Peri's "Dafne" and Monteverdi's "Orfeo" have been categorised in this manner. They have pastoral elements but are they "pastoral operas"? --Folantin 18:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I need to read more about what exactly a pastoral opera is supposed to be. Perhaps it should be a supercategory? Mak (talk) 18:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Ceremony of Carols

Humble thanks for your reversion of my evidently uninformed "correction" of spelling. I don't have the material available to me, and indeed it had crossed my mind that "Gracias" [sic] was verbatim. I'll know better in the future, and in my editing elsewhere as well! -- Cheers, Deborahjay 23:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

With historical stuff, it's good to double-check spellings, because what is correct now was not necessarily what was used at the time, and in fact multiple equally valid spellings may have been used at the time. Thus, I myself wouldn't say [sic] after "Gracias", because historically it's a perfectly correct spelling, it's only much more recently that spelling has become so regimented. Erm, so what I mean to say is, no problem! Mak (talk) 01:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

To be clear - I wrote the [sic] [sic] only in my note to you, here (above) -- wouldn't have presumed to do so on the page!

My brother's h.s. choir in L.A. sang the "Deo Gracias" in the early 1970s, and last year my music-major daughter's sang the "Wolcum Yole!" with hers (in Israel, incongruously enough, and certainly out of season :-) I haven't gotten up my nerve to suggest D.G. to the director as a follow-up, but as this is one of the few mixed choirs up here in the sparsely-populated north, it might go over big, and who knows, perhaps they could take it on the road...? Or to paraphrase, "Next year in Bethlehem...!" -- Cheers, Deborahjay 05:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC

Wish I could have been there. That looks like quite the turnout. When we had one in my burg only two people showed up: Angela and me. (That was fun though.) How was it? Antandrus (talk) 05:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I missed the meetup, but my girlfriend was not about to give up our Saturday evening, as we had other commitments during the weekend. Be well, -- Ssilvers 15:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
No problem Ssilvers, I can sympathize. The meetup was pretty fun, and everyone was actually a lot more agreeable than I feared :) There were a few users I had conversed with to some extent, and many more I'd never run into. There were even a couple people who had never edited WP, but were interested in creating a wiki-based startup. Overall, the conversation was interesting and very civil, except for one random unaffiliated drunk guy who crashed our circle and was kind of annoying. I'm actually in a couple of the pictures, mostly making rather strange faces. (hm, I guess I should add captions, at some point). Mak (talk) 17:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like it was a big success, and why not? The NY area has many Wikipedians, so it makes sense that we would have a vital group. I hope to make it next time. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 21:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your block note

Hi, thanks for your block note. I am working on a bot called User:PocKleanBot and as you say it has written the same template to a few pages. The reason for this is that it does keep a list of articles for which it has already been run but at this point its obviously not recalling values from it correctly. The bot is still in development but its very difficult to develop it without testing it occasionally and observing the output. I am aware this causes something of a nuisance for users and so left it as late as I could in the development process.

I have now corrected this problem I think, but it could cause the same problem again if unblocked and re-run.

What would you recommend?

PocklingtonDan 18:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I hope I didn't come off as angry or anything. I appreciate the work you're doing. Cheers, Mak (talk) 19:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Not at all, you've been great. Its some of the other disproprtionately angry responses I don't quite understand! I'm running the bot now and it is defintiely working now and not writing to a page where its template already exists. Thanks for your patience! :-) - PocklingtonDan 19:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tragédie en musique

Sorry about the cut/paste. Actually I have been trying to find out the right way to do this. If you can let me know I will be grateful. (Maybe I shouldn't tell you about my other crimes . . . .) - Kleinzach 00:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/k/User_talk%7EMakemi_Archive6_8030.html"