User talk:Ivan Velikii

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] License tagging for Image:Roman Nose, Fort Laramie, 1868.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Roman Nose, Fort Laramie, 1868.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

~~Wikipedia:Image use policy~~
~~Wikipedia:Image copyright tags~~

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Do not worry about the above, I have tagged the image as {{PD-US}}--Ezeu 00:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed content from Roman Nose. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Lordkinbote 18:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Ivan Velikii, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

If you are interested in Russia-related themes, you may want to check out the Russian Portal, particularly the Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board. You may even want to add these boards to your watchlist.

Again, welcome! abakharev 00:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Modest Musorgskiy, 1870.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Modest Musorgskiy, 1870.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

I have put PD-old copyright tag to the image abakharev 01:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arseny Golenishev-Kutuzov

In this article title, his first name is spelled "Arseny", but in the article itself, it's spelled "Arseniy". Which one did you intend to use? Thank you, ugen64 22:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bolding Cyrillic names

Please stop bolding Cyrillic names of Russian rulers. This does not comply with WP:STYLE. As the project is English, there is no need to shout Russian names. Ask User:Ezhiki for details. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 10:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Five/The Mighty Handful

I'm putting my response on your talk page, as well as at the page's discussion page, so that you see it.

- What would it change if "those Frenchies", as you choose to call them, had been involved? I made the change and I'm an American. I do happen to be a French music specialist. Does this make me unqualified to discuss this article?
  - This isn't about how people "prefer" this group to be called: this is about standard English usage as is practiced in English-speaking countries. To quote Wikipedia:Naming_conventions
  - "articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists."
  - I made the change because this is how this group is usuually refered to in English, as these very "standard" references prove. This is the English lanuage section of Wikipedia. I think that it's perfect that you use "Могучая кучка" in the Russian Language version, but most sources in English use "The Five". You will notice that after I made the name change, i also added the other names by which this group is known, as translated into English. Most English speakers will find "The Five" and then they will find the knowledge that, in Russian, this group is known as "The Mighty Handful". It seems to me that this will further people's education, since they won't know to look for the "Mighty Handful", but they WILL look for "the Five".

- - The change was made almost a month ago and no one has noticed before. Perhaps you might want to bring this point up for discussion at the discussion page of the Wikiproject for composers and see what the general reaction is. Cordially Musikfabrik 19:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Boris Godunov (opera)

Can you help? Someone today changed occurrences of "Rimsky-Korsakov" to "Rimskiy-Korsakov" in the article Boris Godunov (opera). This is probably just another way to anglicize that name. The problem is that Rimsky-Korsakov is the version used elsewhere on Wikipedia.

I couldn't find any other time where "Rimskiy-Korsakov" was used in Wikipedia, except in one edit of yours back on 20 August 2006.

Anyway, since you do so much on this article, you should know which way is the correct way to do the name. Could you check this? Shenme 06:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

DEAR IVAN, can you write me at bagnoli@pendragon.it ? I need information about BORIS GODUNOV thank you

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Aleksandr Borodin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aleksandr Borodin.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 23:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. |EPO| 23:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Nikolsky.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nikolsky.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 07:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Four minimal stubs for Smetana operas

I see you have started four articles for Smetana operas, each a matter of six or seven words - no other information, no sources, nothing! Are you intending to develop these articles? At the moment the Opera Project is working on Smetana operas so we would be interested in knowing your intentions. (Normally minimal stubs are deplored if they are not developed.) -- Kleinzach 14:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

In fact why don't you come and join us in the project at WP:WPO? I notice you've done a lot of work on the Russian opera repertory and we would appreciate having you as one of the people involved in our discussions.--Peter cohen 17:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to your message

Hi, Ivan. I've seen your message on my page and see you're stil polishing it. It's very late here. So I shan't give a detailed reply now, but may come back again later.

My invitation to you to join the opera project was meant to be an acknowledgment that your work on Boris and other Russian operas was valuable. Some other editors can be a bit abrupt and I wanted to add something encouraging after Kleinzach's remarks. Most people who commented on whether the re-orchestration material should be included in the main Boris article or not were positive and I had got the impression already that you had done most of the work. You've just confirmed my suspicions that the IP edits were by you as well as the ones under your own id.

It is easy to get upset by what some people say on Wikipedia. I have got so myself on occasions. But I hope that in a few hours, or a day or two at most, you'll be feeling happier again. As I said elsewhere, a bit more referencing etc, and your article should be able to get through the good article process.

Wikipedia projects aren't that formal. You could have joined without an invitation. It would be useful if you did join, because that way we could co-ordinate work better. I was going to write something on [[Libuse (opera)] anyway before you started it. If you took part in our discussions it would make it easier to split up who does what. We are having a drive on Smetana, Janacek and Dvorak this month, so there is plenty of work to go round. Co-ordinating saves two of us from duplicating effort (both reading a libretto, say). I shan't pretend that people don't argue in the project sometimes. But it would be useful at least for you to watch our discussions so you have an idea what other opera-oriented people are up to.

And please don't leave Wikipedia altogether. Because of your work, the Boris article is so much better than it was, and we need as many good editors as we can get.--Peter cohen 00:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Something I should add is that, if you don't like someone else's edits ot an article page, you can revert them or improve them. But then you need to provide an explanation. What Wikipedia as a whole doesn't like is edit warring where people keep on reverting each other's changes. It probably is better to say in advance that you don't like these changes because of x and y, therefore you are changing them. Hopefully a discussion would then resolve things. Of course, if it is a matter of changing things inline with Wikipedia policy, then the policy wins out. If two fo you can't agree, then the advantage of thing like the opera wikiproject is that it is a place where you can find several other people who know about the opera and they might be able to make suggestions that you are both happy with. Anyway I hope you will in the end to be happy to join us. A diligent editor who can work on articles steadilly is a valuable resource.--Peter cohen 15:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prince Igor

Hi Ivan, As you can see, I've added some more material to the Prince Igor about the Mariinsky edition. (I've only recently acquired the Philips recording as my first version of the opera. I don't know why it's not better known in the West.) I'm happy to work in cooperation with you on the article whether or not you join WP:WPO. --Peter cohen 13:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I've just done a few edits to the article, mainly copy-editing towards uniformity. We had multiple spellings of "Polovtsian", "Nikolai" (Rimsky-Korsakov), "Alexander" (Glazunov). The variations are all valid transliterations but not sticking to one looked messy. I've settled on the the majority spellings in the article or ones that match the articles on those subjects. I have also made the footnote style more uniform, converging on something in between what you and I had done previously and put the main book details in the references.

It's good that you have access to the Grove article. What we have now is an article bordering on B class by the opera-project's marking scheme. (See the table giving the points scheme for opera articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Richard Wagner/Assessment. As we're currently pilotting it, suggestions on gaps or wrong emphasis in the scheme are particularly welcome.) Before you got involved, the article wasn't much more than a stub. And at the rate you're now working on it, it will soon be a clear B. In my opinion, the biggest weaknesses at present are the skimpiness of the synopsis and the lack of discussion of the critical reception of the opera, of when and for how long Borodin worked on the opera, and the lack of musical examples. Improvements on one or two of these would make the article a clear B. To go for Good Article status, we should address all these point and need to continue to increase the level of inline referencing.

Please, let me know what you think.--Peter cohen 10:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Ivan. I've started work on the synopsis, as you suggested. I'm basing it on the libretto from the Gergiev recording, the only one with libretto that I have This is fine for its first three scenes (Prologue, traditional act 2, traditional act 1 scene 1) but the material diverges thereafter. Do you have a libretto of the Rimsky-Korsakov edition, so that we can record the differences in the contents of the versions for Act 2 Sc 2, Act 3 and Act 4? I'm trying to control my Wikipedia time. So I'm intending to just do one scene a day.--Peter cohen 22:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Ivan. I have now finished the synopsis. Please check it against your libretto for the Rimsky edition. I believe that it is the last three scenes where there have been changes in the Faliek edition.--Peter cohen 14:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glad to see you back

Hi Ivan. I was worried that you might have left Wikipedia. I'm glad to see you editing again. --Peter cohen 10:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Mussorgsky young b.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mussorgsky young b.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —An gr 16:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Musorgsky and Brother.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Musorgsky and Brother.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —An gr 16:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:NARK.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:NARK.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 121.112.124.72 (talk) 11:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hi Ivan the Great, just wanted to say "thank you!" for the great clean-up and sourcing job you did last week on A Night on the Bare Mountain. It's great to see these articles getting good editing. Thanks! --JayHenry (talk) 07:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Compliments

		The Original Barnstar
		Thankyou very much for your marvellous work on Mussorgsky, especially Boris. Can we have the picture of Chaliapin from the Paris 1908 Boris too? - so moody! I hope to see something similar from you on Khovantschina (if you haven't yet done it). Please accept this paltry tribute of admiration. Eebahgum (talk) 16:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prince Igor again

Hi Ivan, I see you're back working on Prince Igor. I think that if you're talking about things as beign "better explanations", then you had better reference a source that describes it as such.

And Congratulations on the barn star.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Bilibin_-_Chernomor_and_33_heroes.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bilibin_-_Chernomor_and_33_heroes.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 04:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic opera class-rating

Hi Ivan, Just to let you know that as a preliminary step in evaluation WP:WPO is classifying all non-stub opera articles that have not been previously assessed as good or features as start class. So this is not someone saying that anything you have contributed to is poor. Please bring our attention to ones that should be assessed higher.

Bear in mind that out trial on Wagner articles has been commented as being rather strict. So some pretty decent articles may still come out as Start. The criteria are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera/Assessment. --Peter cohen (talk) 13:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)