User talk:NewYork1956

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Thanks for a barnstar

Its great to have such honor. Can you plase then, place it on my page, just follow the link GK tramrunner 19:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voice Type

Hey there -- Just curious, do you know anything about the musician banner? It seems it should have an option for voice type, rather than just instrument, at least for opera singers. Otherwise, "vocals" simply has kind of a pop connotation, right? I tried to look into it, but am not sure how I'd even make that change. Best, Mackan79 22:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Why not use "voice"? The singer's instrument is her voice, after all. Unfortunately "voice" points to a disambiguation page, but it is the right word in this context. Paul 22:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
We could do that, which I think would be a bit better. At the same time, when the box already lists that he's an opera singer, it's also a bit redundant. I left a message on the talkpage for the template [1] (I think.. there's no "2", which I couldn't figure out) suggesting that maybe the template could add a category for voice part, for opera singers, simply because it would be more useful information. For now I tried a third option on Jussi Bjorling though -- what do you think? Mackan79 23:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I like it very much. Paul

Hi NY, are you sure about that? I've never heard of operatic singing being referred to as "vocals;" I'm fairly sure that has a popular music connotation. I see the definition at dictionary.com here[2]:

n.
  1. A vocal sound.
  2. Music A popular composition for a singer, often with instrumental accompaniment.

In opera, my experience is that people speak of either a voice type or a fach, those being the most direct analogies to a singer's instrument. Is there a reason you prefer vocals to voice? Best, Mackan79 03:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I support the last comment. The idiomatic term in art music is "voice" not "vocals" - the latter is used in popular music. The term "vocals" is not used in writing about opera. Paul 03:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Vocals were Jussi's instrument. Tenor is not an instrument.NewYork1956 04:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I was simply hoping to say "voice" for his instrument rather than vocals -- I agree with you that "tenor" alone wasn't the best. "Voice (Tenor)" speaks to his instrument, though, much more than it speaks to his profession. As Paul says, "Vocals" simply isn't used in regard to opera. I just tried a Google search on "Bjorling's vocals" or "Caruso's vocals" out of curiosity, and didn't get a single hit for either. "Bjorling's voice," or "Caruso's voice," on the other hand, get 164 and over a thousand hits respectively. Thoughts? Mackan79 04:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
What the hell difference does it make? Voice and Vocals are the same damn thing. NewYork1956 05:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Because! It's like calling Verdi a "song-writer." You just can't do it; it's insulting to the genre. Anyway, why not use the more prevalent term? I promise, many opera enthusiasists will have a serious problem with calling opera singing "vocals." It makes it sound like pop music! Can you work with me here? Mackan79 05:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Mackan79 is correct. To use the word "vocals" in this context would look ridiculous to someone familiar with art music. It does make a difference to the credibility of the article. Paul 12:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

All these other Opera singer's pages have "Vocals" in the same place: Maria Callas, Erna Sack, Giuseppe Di Stefano, Mario Lanza, Lauritz Melchior, Franco Corelli, Enrico Caruso, Pilar Lorengar, Alfredo Kraus, Licia Albanese, Kathryn Grayson, Hermann Prey and Jan Peerce. Why should Bjorling's be any different? It would look stupid if they're all different. Do what ever you want. I don't even like Bjorling, I just thought he deserved a better page, and I'd like to think that it is now compared to what it was before I touched it. NewYork1956 06:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I agree, the userbox makes the page look much better. You probably won't appreciate this, though, but I'd actually really suggest making the same change on each of the other pages as well. I know why they're there -- the Userbox instructions tell us to use "vocals" for singers, but I'm pretty sure they weren't thinking about opera when they said that. There's actually an opera Wikiproject, I think, maybe we could run it by them. Anyway, thanks for adding the box, which does look a lot better. Best, Mackan79 15:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

As a musicologist and occasional critic of classical music, I support a change back to "voice" or "tenor voice" - but I don't want an edit war. Are you OK with that change? Paul 19:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I have now checked the articles on a few of the other famous tenors and found that the pages for Pavarotti and Domingo already say "voice" - so I will go ahead and make the change wherever it's needed, for consistency. Paul 19:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks guys, I think it looks good. Best, Mackan79 22:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Callas Picture

Hi there, my friend!! I really like the "musician box" that was added to the Callas article. I am not crazy about the photo as the FIRST photograph. I think an artist of the caliber of Callas and as iconic as she really needs something more than a casual photo. A great photo of her as Norma or Medea or Violetta would be good, but I really do like the Beaton photograph, since it is a giant of the art of photography taking a photo of a giant in the field of music and opera. I think the winking photo is very charming indeed, but would serve the article better lower in the article.

I've been working hard trying to put the article back together, to it would meet editorial approval. It's footnoted to death, but every damned little thing is cited and sourced!! I think it's turning out even better than what I had done before. What do you think?? Shahrdad 23:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think it looks really cute lower in the article. The pic is from the 60's, so I can see it fitting in the vocal problems area too, since it is a photo of her past her vocal prime. As for the Beaton photo, I always thought she looked quite youthful and VERY human in it. She was after all a girl with greasy skin and acne problems, all of which made her far more human than many of her other photos. You also realize what a young girl she was. Would you mind putting it back, maybe till you find something else that's a better fit for the header photo than the "knowing glance" photo??

Oh, and on the Wikiquote section, I added a conversation Albert Innaurato had had with Scotto about Callas which is very revealing. Scotto, unlike what a lot of Callas fans think, was not a bitch who was jealous of Callas; She just would get exasperated by the comparisons, since she was great in her own way. But she understood what made Callas what she was and why shy was a genius. btw, feel free to email me at shahrdad@msn.com Shahrdad 00:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I do like the Violetta photo a lot! See if you can find a good place for the Beaton photo, for I'd really love to keep that one too!Shahrdad 01:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Let me think about it a bit. Meanwhile let me know if you find any other ones that would fit the bill. The Traviata one is certainly lovely and it's one of her greatest roles. I LOVE the scary Medea photo, but it's too scary for the first pic. Something from Norma would be great too, and she certainly looked beautiful in the Paris production, even if her voice was mostly gone. Shahrdad 01:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Looks GREAT!!! I love it too!!Shahrdad 12:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what you did regarding the copyright issues with the Violetta pic, but it WAS on the cover of the second edition of "The Callas Legacy: The Biography of a Career." If you need to re upload nad modify the info, now u have it !! :)Shahrdad 15:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alexz Johnson Article

Thanks for adding some more precision to the article. By the way, as someone who knows a lot about music, I'd be interested in your impressions (so far) of Alexz Johnson.

User:JD_Fan 29 Jan 07

[edit] Thanks for replying

Thanks for getting back to me on this. For my part, I know that I really like her singing. In my opinion, she is excellent on the expression and the fine details, but I'm not sure how much my opinion is worth on these matters. That's why I was interested in an expert opinion. I'd like to think that she benefitted from her training with Joseph Shore, but I leave that to your judgment.

To date, her songs have been tailored to the TV show in which she plays the lead role - Instant Star, a show aimed primarily at teenagers. (I only found out about her music because of a compilation CD that my daughters gave me.) She will have an album of her own later this year, and at that point, we'll see what her own music is really like. In the meantime, there are some song samples at: Audio - Instant Star on The-N

User:JD_Fan 29 Jan 07

Thanks for getting back to me with your comments. I didn't expect that you would like that type of music. Maybe her solo album (apart from the show) will be different - aimed at an audience outside the teenage demographic.

User:JD_Fan 30 Jan 07


[edit] Over to Opera and the Classics

Sorry to have steered you to the wrong genre with Alexz Johnson. For something that is more your cup of tea, you might want to hear Shannon Mercerwho is doing very well here in Canada, singing opera and the classics. We go to hear her whenever she is in town.

User:JD_Fan 30 Jan 07

[edit] Renata Tebaldi

If you are going to replace a picture in an article and insert another of your choice, please have the good grace to say that you have done so in your edit summary and also keep the original picture somewhere else in the article, unless there is a compelling reason not to, in which case, please also state. Thanks. Orbicle 10:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

  • You replied:

Excuse me for replacing a crap picture with a good one on an article for a singer I don't even like! Viva La Callas!

So much for objectivity! I now know what importance to attach to your edits. Orbicle 10:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Easton

I will look at the article. I was just reading about her somewhere, and it sounds like she was an amazing singer. As for Tebaldi, I think her article could use some cleanup. There are no references whatsoever. I am not a huge fan, but she was undoubtedly a wonderful singer and a committed musician. As Walter Tausig said, Callas- Artist; Tebaldi--Wonderful singer. I think Tebaldi was a wonderful singer indeed, though her technique was incomplete (no florid ability), and she deserves to be appreciated. But as Renata Scotto said, Callas was the genius.Shahrdad 09:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I just read it, and it's very good indeed. I kind of like that narrative style without footnotes far better, but I guess the Callas article is as good as any research paper and painstakingly referenced. ugh.Shahrdad 09:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Callas Photo

Hey there!! The Callas Traviata Photo got removed form Wikipedia. Can u reupload it and copyright it as a Book Cover (The Callas Legacy, second edition). thanks!! Shahrdad 22:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I think somehow they thought the copywrite wasn't good enough. They also removed the Beaton pic, which I put back.Shahrdad 03:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grace Moore

I assume she was really born in 1898, but here are some sources that give the 1901 date: http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/imagegallery.php?EntryID=M119 (1901 is the only date listed), http://www.wvc.net/~wil/history.htm#13 (1938 article lists her birthdate as 1901, citing Who's Who in America), http://www.musicals101.com/who6d.htm (1901 is the only date listed), and http://www.lib.utk.edu/spcoll/manuscripts/ms2341fa.html (lists both dates).

Hey, I'm glad you added the infobox, etc., but I was put off by your edit note on the article -- your attitude seemed un-Wikipedia-like. Consistent with WP:BITE, it seems impolitic to chastise other contributors for hard work that happens to fall short of your particular standard of perfection.

I don't know much about opera, and I knew even less about Moore when I tackled the Grace Moore article. I was puzzled by a reference to her in the Chattanooga, Tennessee article, since I was aware that her childhood is the single most famous thing that ever happened to the little 'burg of Jellico, Tennessee. To resolve the confusion, I researched her and greatly expanded the stub. I figured I had added a lot of information value to the article, but I am not particularly interested in learning the technical aspects of creating infoboxes, so I didn't do one -- I figured that an opera or movie buff would come along and take care of that sooner or later (but it took you nearly 3 months!). There was no Karl Millöcker article when I last worked on Grace Moore, so I'm glad you had the knowledge to fill in that blank. As I see it, the other linkifying is a matter more of stylistic preference than of convention (and that article was a paragon compared to many that I have encountered here). Sorry about messing up the YouTube link -- I'm glad you sorted it out. --orlady 03:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opera

The Barnstar of High Culture
Thank you for your contirbutions to opera related articles.
FanOfTheOpera 06:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


No problem. FanOfTheOpera 06:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use images on your userpage

Per my response on my talk page, I have reverted your re-insertion of fair use policies from your userpage. Such usage is directly against our policies as described at Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9. Further, I have reported this matter to at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_insisting_on_having_fair_use_images_on_his_userpage as I indicated I would. Thank you, --Durin 12:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Durin; you cannot have fair use images on your userpage. Additionally, he is perfectly within his right to remove them, even though he is not an administrator. Please remember that you do not own any page, not even your userpage. Veinor (talk to me) 13:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
However, Veinor, civility guidelines indicate he should have discussed the matter before unilaterally deleting images he found on another user's page. Like rock trumps scissors and paper trumps rock, civility trumps own when it comes to Wiki policies and guidelines. Jeffpw 13:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • This issue was already discussed at length, generating an RfC which resulted in overwhelming consensus that what I was doing, with detailed edit summaries, was entirely appropriate and proper. Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Durin and fair use image removals. If you wish to use the trumping analogy (there is no such hierarchy of policy on Wikipedia) copyright violations trump civility. Imagine being in court, pleading your case with "Well, we didn't remove the copyright violation because we didn't want to offend the person who made the violation". That simply wouldn't fly. Our policies in this matter are clear an unequivocal; no fair use outside of the main article namespace. Despite hundreds of challenges large and small to this policy, it has stood unchanged for a long time. The Wikimedia Foundation takes copyright seriously, and must since the project's very existence depends upon them taking a strong stance on this issue. --Durin 14:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't think so Jeffpw. Fair use images outside of articles are a matter of copyright infringement, they are to be removed on sight, unilaterally. A message after the fact is plenty. It is not uncivil to do so, it is just protecting Wikipedia from legal danger. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 14:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Administrators

It is a common misconception that administrators represent a different class of users. Unfortunately, per WP:ADMIN, that is simply not the case. You will notice on that page that "Any user can behave in a way befitting an administrator (provided they do not falsely claim to be one), even if they have not been given the extra administrative functions." Suggesting that a user who merely has not been granted sysop status by a bureaucrat cannot act in the function of an administrator is, simply, wrong. --Iamunknown 02:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I highly dispute the suggestion that administrators are an upper class, but I am unwilling to go in detail at risk of becoming worked up. I guess that we'll have to agree to disagree. --Iamunknown 19:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for barnstar

Hello NewYork1956 - Thanks for the barnstar. It's an honor. My goal is to get the New York City article up to featured status. We're getting there! Momos 04:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New York City culture pic

Hello,

You seem to be quite an active wikipedian, so I'm sure I don't have to remind you that repeatedly undoing someone's edits without discussion is a breach of assuming good faith. The picture of the Metropolitan Opera is nice, but it predominately just shows the fountain in front. Also, it's been on the article for quite some time, and I think it's generally good to have pictures revolve and change on the article. I understand you're a music lover, but insisting on that picture above all others is not exactly objective. The Greenwich Village pic references culture outside the bounds of stuffy white buildings, and plenty of great music has come from the village too! Please consider and get back to me, so as to prevent a silly revert war. --Jleon 13:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/e/w/User_talk%7ENewYork1956_5943.html"