User talk:Just plain Bill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi. Bill here. carry on...

I will answer you here, so please watch this page if you start a new heading.
If I start one on your talk page, I will watch there, to keep the discussion on one page.

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Just plain Bill, 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! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! — Kbh3^rd talk 20:02, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

thanks! Just plain Bill 21:00, 22 December 2005 (UTC) mmm, tildes!

Thanks for the picture of the chinrest screw-thing for this article. Appreciated!--ViolinGirl^♪ 22:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Violin bridge

Thanks for adding the picture. If you ever have the opportunity, it might be good to have a picture of the same bridge before and after fitting. — Kbh3^rd talk 18:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: de-stubify Nut (instrumental)?

Hehe, I stubbed a lot of articles around that time, but you've added good information to it. However I would have to disagree with you on the point that it supposedly "might never be much bigger"; I believe that all articles on a wiki can become more comprehensive, no matter how little there is to speak of it. Also, it's hard to say what is a stub and what isn't. According to WP:STUB, "it must be long enough to at least define the article's title, which generally means 3 to 10 short sentences". On my count, Nut (instrumental) is 5 long sentences.

It seems long enough and comprehensive enough to not be a stub, but feels too short if I remove the stub. What do you think? Help me out here, please :) -- Daverocks 11:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Violin

Hey, Bill. Thanks for all your work on the Violin article—you're a one-man WikiProject Violin. I've moved the open strings image back up to the top of the article, and also gone through and replaced the linked headers with "further information" thingamajigs. It's good that you're moving stuff around and bringing down the size of the article; I was wondering what your plan was for pages like Playing the violin, which is currently almost identical (as far as I can tell) to the main article text. Do you plan to abridge the corresponding sections in the violin article?

Keep up the good work :) —Miles←☎ 01:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I second that good work comment ^ except in regard to the tailpiece article. I like your picture better. Thanks! And, thanks for letting me know! --ViolinGirl^♪ 01:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Bill, I just realized who you were! LOL! --ViolinGirl^♪ 23:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I blog regularly there...right now my latest post is fourth from the top. ;) It's where you think it is. --ViolinGirl^♪ 23:40, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I'll die of embarrasment if I'm wrong, but even if I am, you should join because I know you'd love it. V--------.com... :) --ViolinGirl^♪ 23:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so here's the real link. [1] Enjoy... :D --ViolinGirl^♪ 00:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: the picture...thanks! I'm working on a CLEP exam (See this...I'm working there while I study), and found it while studying...don't ask me how, you know how seductive those blue links are! ;) --ViolinGirl^♪ 23:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

And WOOOOOT! We have a violin series! Wow, I bet you were influential in that?? NICE!!!--ViolinGirl^♪ 23:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

ROFL...I literally gasped for breath when I saw that! LOL...wipes tears from eyes. Wow, I've got to quiet down or my parents will be up here..."WHAT ON EARTH IS WRONG WITH YOU, GIRL?" Thank you SO much, that was hilarious!--ViolinGirl^♪ 23:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the story, I appreciate it...but don't quite get it, although I think I would with a little explaining. You mind?--ViolinGirl^♪ 01:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Bill, I’m familiar with the account from Mark about the rolling away of the stone, but I’m not quite sure why it was funny that Rev. Isely kept asking “Who will roll away the stone?” I’m sorry…I seem to be really thick…*massages temples*--ViolinGirl^♪ 15:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox

I would like you to know that I have moved the userbox you have created at "Just plain Bill/sequitur" to your user space: User:Just plain Bill/sequitur. Regards, Mike Rosoft 09:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

My fat fingers yet again, cheers for the fix. (Now I'll go over to your talk page and thank you properly.) Just plain Bill

[edit] Alasdair Fraser

Hi. I'm not sure what you did to piss off the guy that started Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alasdair Fraser but it's a pretty clear keep. You might want to add a full discography to the article though to prevent anyone else from attempting this! :) —Wknight94 (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Not taking it personally, not even convinced he's annoyed. He describes himself as a stubborn argumentative sort, so this may just be his style. At any rate, I created the article to fill in a red link, and filled the stub with waffle that resembled a press release or advertisement; that may be what he took exception to. Just plain Bill 15:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Violin article

Aw, shucks. No apology needed. Just keep up your fine tuning (so to speak). ==ILike2BeAnonymous 01:47, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't quite get what you put on the talk page of the 'There is a difference' part in the Violin article... Lady Nimue of the Lake 10:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

It's just a list of things that may apply to violinists or fiddlers, some more, some less, some not at all. I meant it as food for thought more than anything else. Just plain Bill 03:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Vn bridge.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Vn bridge.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 13:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem, tag applied Just plain Bill 15:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black hole (musical equipment)

Hi Bill. As you were involved in the AFD article, and seem like the expert on such things, I have closed the AFD on Black hole (musical equipment) as a redirect to Endpin. The talk page (Talk:Black hole (musical equipment) remains, as it has some potentially useful info on it, and what was in the Black hole (musical equipment) article itself remains in the redirect's history (here). All the best, Proto||type 14:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, dear, now I've been labeled an "expert." You should know that "X" is an unknown quantity, "ex" is a has-been, and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure. Seriously, thanks, Proto~~type~~. cheers, _Just plain Bill 14:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Violin Construction

I've done the C-Bouts, the fine tuners and the chin to root pointers etc... I don't know how i'm going to fit the finger board idea on... andy idea would be appreciated Sotakeit 15:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Done - almost. Just need to know where the "nuts" are... Sotakeit 11:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cool picture

I love your picture of the mouse! it is so cute!! by the way bill i play the violon too!! cool man! Loo Loo :)

I too love your pictures! it is really cute! I play the viola, violin and piano. Talk to me on my talk page! Regeane Silverwolf 03:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I found the pic on Commons:Featured pictures __ Just plain Bill

Maybe you're pretty tired of this, but I lurve your piccies! Adorably cute, especially mouse! Lady Nimue of the Lake 08:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tuner

Hi Bill! I don't think we've come across each other on Wikipedia before. I made an edit here which I thought made more sense than what was there before. However, I was thinking that perhaps we both have different ideas of what we are talking about. What is the tuner you are referring to? --HappyCamper 04:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey there Happy Camper, I do think we have seen each other somewhere else... the tuners I'm talking about are the ones that screw into the holes of the tailpiece and hang out into the space between TP and bridge. That amounts to a fair chunk of metal for three or four of them. You say twisting the treble-side pegs isn't your thing; you've probably seen talk of Perfection planetary-geared pegs, and I can testify that they work fine, look like they'll last a long time. Be well, old bud, Just plain Bill 09:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bugle Calls

Hi Bill - I noticed that you've done some edits to the Bugle Call article. I have the resources to create the music files for all the calls, but am looking to confirm that the calls themselves are in the public domain. I am pretty sure most are since they are traditional military calls, and very old. Can you tell me of a reference that would show me that the calls are PD ?

I don't have a paper copy in my hand just now, but the Upton reference in Bugle call is about 140 years old, putting the US calls pretty solidly in the public domain. Last time I saw a copy was in the 1970's when I lifted out a harmony part for "Retreat" to play at a Scout camp. If you found a gov't publication with the calls in it, that would relieve the copyright burden as well, I imagine. Just plain Bill 03:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

(Seems to me that further additions to this discussion will be more visible / useful on Jazzmanian's talk page.) __Just plain Bill 06:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Bill - It's been a while since I looked at the Bugle Calls page, but with Rememberance Day approaching, I had to head back to brush up for the ceremony. I noticed the JPG files I uploaded had been replaced with fuzzy PNG files, and read the reational behind the move. In an effort to improve the page, and move to the latest wiki standards I have uploaded two SVG files to the wiki commons for "Last Post" and "First Call", and replaced the Last Post JPG completely, while temporarily placing the First Call SVG right below the PNG.

I have my original 20 scores in AI files that I can port over to Inkscape and SVG - do you think this is a good plan ?

Thanks - jazzmanian oh - sorry - forgot to tag my last edit to the page (my bad) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazzmanian (talk • contribs) 23:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, SVG is the way to go. With the tools available to me, Assembly's SVG took a lot of manual futzing, so the project went on my back burner. If you've got the time and inclination and an automated way to do it, please do. I'd suggest keeping the presentation of the calls no wider than Call to Quarters or the earlier First Call. I hope there's an easy way to split your SVG into two lines, for example. I'm guessing 600 pixels wide is a good maximum, and I bet there's some guidance to be found in the wikipedia about that. Soon as I have time to find it, I'll point it out, if you don't get there first... Thanks! __Just plain Bill 00:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Wiki suggested 600-800 wide, so I started at 700. Of course I could change that ? Tommorow I'll post one at 600 to see which one is better liked. - Jazzmanian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazzmanian (talk • contribs) 00:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, that works for me. I need to go find an old CRT display and see how it renders on that before making any more grand pronouncements... ;-) __Just plain Bill 00:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

different machine now, and here it is, the grand pronouncement: First Call (the SVG) falls off the edge of the CRT, and I have to scroll sideways to see all of it. I prefer making the viewer jump through fewer hoops, so I think 600 will be a better choice, but that's just one editor's opinion. Thanks again for stepping up to this task. __Just plain Bill 01:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Bill, I've uploaded all my completed (to date) bugle call scores. You can see them in my contributions in the wiki commons. I've added the many to the Bugle calls page, but for the moment did not remove the PNG files. I don't know if they should stay or if you would like to remove them as editor ?

P.S. is there an article on fitting a violin bridge to a violin ? I could really use such an article right now, as my son has a violin and I know the action should not be that high ! (I play guitar myself) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.17.254 (talk) 16:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not "the editor" of the article, just another contributor. (Naturally, I take an interest in it and watch what happens there.) Wikipedia policy encourages you to make the changes you see fit. If, heaven forbid, someone screws things up, the history is there, and things can be untangled, or at least reverted back to a previous state.

I'm not aware of a violin bridge-fitting article here, and there shouldn't really be one. If you go over to the Fiddle Forum and search or ask, I bet you'll get some useful info.

__Just plain Bill 00:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's something of interest I just discovered. The Boy Scouts page used to have some bad scans of calls (If I remember well enough), and now they have posted all the JPG versions I once uploaded to the wikipedia article. Cool ! http://www.usscouts.org/mb/bugle_calls.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.17.254 (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it's neat to see your stuff propagate like that. Way I see it is, open-source systems, wikis included, can give you your fifteen minutes of fame without having to deal with the paparazzi following you around. Kind of a cool feeling, isn't it? __Just plain Bill 02:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strangs

Check this new discussion topic on that page when you've got a minute or three. +ILike2BeAnonymous 06:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

By now I know you've seen my response. __Just plain Bill 23:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edit summary from list of violinists article

Hey, Bill.

Your summary said "The only Zachary Pierce who shows up on Google is a gay porn film actor.". Heh; perhaps he's a talented and prolific violinist in his spare time. +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Could be, I suppose, but I bet you'll agree he still needs to be notable as a violinist to stay on the list. That IP has made a variety of edits, some useful, some not, some fixated on putting this Zachary character into inappropriate contexts. So, out he went.. be well, __Just plain Bill 22:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Gideon Freudmann

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Gideon Freudmann, by CA387, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Gideon Freudmann seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Gideon Freudmann, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Gideon Freudmann itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 03:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where did that name you used for "_" come from?

"Sneaks"? That's a new one on me; wasn't even able to find anything from Google, nothing in the Hacker's Dictionary either. Not disputing, just curious: where does that usage come from? +ILike2BeAnonymous 23:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Came from an older ex-IBM guy who had a glass office by a cube farm where I once worked. I heard him use it in the late eighties, presume it came from earlier than that. __Just plain Bill 00:01, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Violin makers and restorers

Hi Bill--I saw you want to merge Category:Violin makers and restorers with Category:Luthiers. I strongly agree that such a merge is appropriate. However, the tag that you have put on the categories is a tag for article merger, not for categories. For categories it is necessary to start a discussion on wikipedia:categories for discussion, which I am about to do for these categories. You might want to check the discussion out and participate in it. Cheers, LeSnail 15:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

On second thought, I have decided it would be better to have a Category:Bowed string instrument makers, and allow Category:Luthiers to contain that and Category:Guitar makers--I think it makes sense to keep those separate, even though there is some cross-over. LeSnail 16:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] c

Hi there, would you be so kind as to provide an indepenant neutral opinion of the image Construccionkaiserrick.jpg at the section of the same name on the talk page of Richmond Medical Center here please? Thank you very much as this may help to alleviate a current debate over its inclusion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cholga (talk • contribs) 01:26, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] 1request for comment

would you mind commenting here please? [2]Cholga^talK! 02:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

dude, I appreciate your difficulty struggling with someone who seems to know he is right, but I don't think I can help here. You have probably seen what I said there by now. About the best advice I have to offer is that everyone believes they are operating from correct premises. If you can turn this into a way of agreement, well, now, that is a worthy accomplishment. __Just plain Bill 02:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To Whom It May Concern (Fingerboard de-fragmentation)

Guitarists are demonstrably conservative. I ask the guitarist to disregard some of what they have learned, only a fraction, and to re-learn what they give away.

If an alternative type of ‘typing keyboard’ were on offer, as opposed to the ‘QWERTY keyboard’, and its producer indicating that said keyboard would ultimately enable the individual to type more intuitively and therefore faster, but, that you would initially have to relearn the keyboard…my experience would suggest most people would decline.

I’ve been playing the aforementioned fingerboard for 7 years and it is a better fingerboard - conventional guitars were superfluous at about the 6-month mark. I am too practical a person as to peruse anything not worth pursuing.

Presently I am recording an arrangement – original arrangement, in the key it was intended for - of the Moonlight Sonata and will post the video at youtube shortly.

If you and your ilk are clever enough to decide that this ‘fingerboard inclusion’ is of no consequence, why is it that you can’t discern such a devastatingly simple idea? I make no apologies.

Yours faithfully,

Paul Medland

Paul, you are preaching to the choir about the QWERTY keyboard here. I typed Dvorak layout for many years, but it became enough of a pain to re-map the keyboard of any machine I happened to be at, that I now go along with the lamentable QWERTY, because it's what we've got.

I don't have any problem wih the brilliance of your idea, as far as dealing with the silly B string and what it does to patterns shifted crosswise, or fretwise. I mostly play strings tuned in fifths, so I can only imagine what it's like to not be able to move a pattern over. Power to you in that regard.

Where we have a problem, is that you've put up info about your own invention, which is original research, and doesn't belong in the wikipedia. When your fret system becomes more wide-spread, then it will have a place here. It won't take a Clapton to put it here, but there ought to be more people playing it than one virtuoso inventor, or at least one virtuoso with some media attention beyond your own site and a YouTube video.

Best regards, __Just plain Bill 01:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

To my mind, if you take the idea of ‘content’ that is presented at wikipedia as being fit for submission i.e. empirical/supported/qualified, then shouldn’t the editors be qualified. But that’s the nature of wikipedia. The problem I have – other than being a wikipedia dunce – IS the plethora of commercial material at wikipedia. If it’s a forum for corporations that don’t need a forum, why don’t editors generally concentrate their efforts on that monumental issue? As long as corporate entries go unchecked, the forum remains flawed, and as such I have no problem following the corporate example. As far as presenting my ideas to the public, there is little more that I can do other than to sell/mortgage the house I live in. I make guitars. If I could, I would have nothing to do with the market place - I personally find it to be repugnant.

Regards Paul Medland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.174.66.209 (talk) 00:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

First, Paul, I am not a wikipedia guru by any stretch. Made some edits, a fair proportion of them have stood the test of wiki-time, more or less. Some I've had to defend, some I've had to abandon, all based on how other editors in the wikipedia community have responded. I mostly concentrate my unpaid volunteer efforts on things I'm interested in, that I have a chance of knowing something about, and the articles on my watchlist. That isn't very many, compared to the more than two million on the English wikipedia. Just one ant in this colony, moving a single grain of sand at a time.

Here is where it says that wikipedia is not a venue for advertisement, nor a marketing tool. In particular, it says, "Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small 'garage' or local companies are not likely to be acceptable."

If you like, no one is stopping you from putting your information back into the Fingerboard article. By the way, I don't recommend doing: Let's say I sympathize and let it stand; I bet another editor will be pretty quick to remove it again. I'm not asking them to; that's just the way the pedia seems to work. Likewise, if you see corporate information that doesn't seem to fit your view of what the pedia should be, you're perfectly free to remove it, keeping in mind that others may hold a different view.

Believe it when I wish you luck getting your idea exposed in the marketplace, as repugnant as we both find it. Best regards, __Just plain Bill 03:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Bill, I appreciate the time you’ve spent on this Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.174.64.64 (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi-Jazz article

Hi. How you doing? I'm still translating the article and have noticed some changes in the ragtime area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz#1890s-1910s... what was written there wasn't reliable information? the worst of all is that I didn't copy that into my PC... perfect...hehe

201.74.128.64 20:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the Jazz article has been seeing a series of changes and reversions recently. There seem to be differences of opinion about what is appropriate to mention, or supportable in a rigorous scholarly fashion, regarding the historical demographics of the genre. Never fear, the history is still available. Just click on a date/time to get the revision of the article as of that particular moment.

Boa sorte!

__Just plain Bill 21:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I really appreciate ur help man. I gotta make some research on local libraries and, mostly, gotta talk to some people whom are specialized on the field... don't know whether u are aware of that fact or not but there are a lot of great jazz musicians here in Brazil. The thing is how to talk to them and how to ask them the right stuffs.

thks again. see you around. 201.74.128.64 03:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess, now i can talk properly.... Willgomes 04:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Slowik

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Peter Slowik, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.oberlin.edu/con/portrait/199910/slowik_peter.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 02:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drawing

Kudos on your work here. Keep cleaning! Cheers, JNW 05:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! There's a lot to be done there and in that neighborhood, as you probably know. Will do, __Just plain Bill 05:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Saz, dutar etc.

Howdy, I saw that you had been patrolling Saz, Dutar etc. for spam links. I thought you'd like to know that "dutarmuzik.com.tr" is now on the spam blacklist. Cheers, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 12:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd have been more sympathetic if he hadn't been so clumsy about it, persistently replacing headings with the site address & so on. __Just plain Bill 15:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Violin family photos

Good job doing the proportional photos at Violin family. Badagnani (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I just copied the sizes from the Korean 'pedia. I notice the Japanese one uses the same layout. __Just plain Bill (talk) 04:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heh, thanks for that wellcome ^^

As I was saying, thanks for the wellcome. :) It's more or less automatical right? Anyways, where did you see me? I haven't edited any articles yet and only writen in a few talks for some articles so far, and the only article I've tried to make was deleted just a few min after I started making it because of lack of impotance... Anyways, thanks for the wellcome and all, and have fun. :) Luredreier 05:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

(replied at User talk:Luredreier :) __Just plain Bill (talk) 10:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I saw :)
And I know about the ~'s I usualy use the link underneath the editing tool to sign althou I sometimes forget or ain't loged on or something..
Er, I actualy donno what TMI means..
Anyways I can imagine it's a little bit of a pain to explain "everyone" about how to do stuff on the wiki..
About everything, there is always some stuff that you, I or anyone else either of us could think of that we don't know about.
I wasn't aware of some of the stuff about notabilety before that deleted article, neither was I aware that there where so good article writing guids out there or so high standars on the better articles.
It was first after all of this that I actuly noticed the fetured articles for instance..
Anyways, thanks again for the wellcome :)
By the way, do you know if there are any articles with lists or shanties or list of shanty singers/groups?
I'd like to see them if there are any and if not there should be one.
I think there should be somewhere where all the names could be added, even the ones that ain't notable enough for their own article, as long as anyone think they're notable enough to be mentioned with a name atleast.
Luredreier 13:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any such lists, but I haven't really gone looking for them. There might be a load of external sites that would be worth linking in the Sea shanty article; again, haven't spent much time looking in that direction lately. That Polish site looks like a good one, but I can't understand most of it. There are probably also some good Dutch sites; those are more likely to be translated into English for guys like me. (TMI is Too Much Info...) __Just plain Bill (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trombone =/= trumpet?

Hi Bill,

Thanks for your friendly comments. I do agree with what you say about "a brass instrument with a mostly cylindrical bore and a cup mouthpiece", and I felt that aspect of the trumpet/trombone relationship was adequately described by the rest of the paragraph, describing them as "counterparts". My issue with the "large trumpet" description was simply that (as you also noted) the trombone is in no way a large trumpet in the modern sense (or even when compared with a baroque or fanfare trumpet - which look superficially more similar - because the trombone is distinguished by its slide). I felt it was less misleading (for someone unfamiliar with brass instruments) to clarify that only the _name_ means "large trumpet" - the instrument itself, though related, is quite distinct from any present or historical trumpet.

Sorry this is a bit wordy - I hope it makes sense! Thanks for raising the question - it's been good for me to clarify my thought processes.

All the best,

Phil Gee 132.244.246.25 (talk) 11:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense, Phil. That part of the article seems like it's in pretty good shape now. Best regards, __Just plain Bill (talk) 16:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of Fiddlers

Hi Bill, thanks for your note on my talk page, but... although there are one or two which *should* have an article (Buddy Spicher for instance, but I think the name is spelt differently), but most of the redlinks are no more than spamlinks, failing WP:SPAM and WP:N. Reverting the list means that you now have an unverified list, failing WP:V I actually think the list should be split into at least 2 lists, one a list of fiddlers, and another, list by genre. If you have any idea how to deal with this massive, meaningless list I would be more than happy to help. I won't revert the article even though it took me hours to sort out. Any chance of a compromise. Regards. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Just restored most of your work, keeping a few of the names I recognize. I bet I missed a lot of other keepers-- stay tuned,,, cheers, __Just plain Bill (talk) 15:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

There is now a very poor article on Buddy Spicher, but look at the "what links here" impressive. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wilma Neruda

Thanks for helping me, step by step I'd like to write the article of Wilma (with your help!?)and than translate it in Italian and German. --Moroderen (talk) 09:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your good work. All I've been doing is forming your excellent input into the language I've been speaking all my life, which is easy for me. I've already put everything I know (which isn't much) about Mme. Neruda into the article. Cheers! __Just plain Bill (talk) 14:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)