Wikipedia

Talk:Michael Laucke/Archive 2

< Talk:Michael Laucke
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Natalie.Desautels in topic Suggestion box
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Heads up on VisualEditor code cruft

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

For some reason VisualEditor likes to throw in random 

<nowiki/>

tags. You can do a search and replace in the view-source to erase them when you're ready to go "live". Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 02:23, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: I noticed that and wondered if it had some hidden purpose; so ...good to know. I'll delete before going live. I still have quite a few items, albeit smaller ones, to impliment including many of your recomendations. But speaking of submitting, I'm not absolutely sure how this is done! Do I simply add the subst:submit code to the top of the draft?
I noticed that the page called List of flamenco guitarists has an entry for Michael Laucke. When clicked, it asks you to create a Michael Laucke page. Could I paste all my code into it and just click Save? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:50, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, not quite, and now no need. That was a red wikilink to a non-existent page, so if you clicked on it you had to create a page, since the Michael_Laucke page was still sitting over in Draft:Michael_Laucke. Now that Laucke's page is live, that wikilink is blue and if you click on it you'll end on Laucke's page. If you had created that page name then the name would have been already taken and we would not be able to do an easy "move" of your draft to that name. Believe or not there are copyright issues too. So if you copied from your Draft and pasted in to another page that could be a copyright violation since other editors had contributed to your draft article. If you're the only contributor you can do a copy/paste move but if not you have to do a merge and preserve attribution for each edit. The safest way to do a move or rename is with that move tab. Moving and renaming are synonymous. Is your head ready to explode yet? FYI, I put in a piece (or work) that Laucke has played in to Google and his new Wikipedia page was the 5th result, and if you just put his name in to Google his new page is at the bottom of the first page of Google results which is pretty darn good! Shortly his Wikipedia page will probably be a number one result when you enter his name in to Google. Another thing, in the left hand column of any article there is a "what links here" link. Click on it to see all the pages that were previously redlinked, but are now bluelinked. Sorry to ramble on. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 10:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Repeating the article name in headings is not suggested

Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

  Done

Repeating the article name in headings is not suggested. ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 03:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Thanks for the awareness thereof ...passed me by. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:35, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, if you interpret it differently when you get around to reading it, let me know! Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 05:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I just made it worse! ...explain a bit more? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

[...] The provisions in § Article titles (above) generally apply to section headings as well (for example, headings are in sentence case, not title case). The following points apply specifically to section headings:

  • Headings should not refer redundantly to the subject of the article, or to higher-level headings, unless doing so is shorter or clearer. (Early life is preferable to His early life when his refers to the subject of the article; headings can be assumed to be about the subject unless otherwise indicated.)
  • Headings should normally not contain links, especially where only part of a heading is linked.
  • Section and subsection headings should preferably be unique within a page; otherwise section links may lead to the wrong place, and automatic edit summaries can be ambiguous.
  • Citations should not be placed within or on the same line as section and subsection headings.
  • Headings should not contain images; this includes flag icons.
  • Headings should not contain questions.
  • Avoid starting headings with numbers (other than years), because this can be confusing for readers with the "Auto-number headings" preference selected [...]
    Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 00:42, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion box

Latest comment: 8 years ago158 comments4 people in discussion

Media section

@Checkingfax: I noticed some articles on music have Media sections. What do you think. We could have the entire CD "Flamenco Road" (10 works), as well as video clips. Some were sent to me today. All copyright is secure. I would suggest including the following. Here are the links for now, but I would place the physical files in Commons.

I am also thinking about making another article just on the Flamenco Road CD and video clip. The title track was number one on video charts across Canada for 5 consecutive weeks and it enjoyed heavy rotation on MuchMusic in the US. Critical reviews are plentiful. This type of success is exceptional for an instrumental album. Successes of this nature happen with voice pieces. The last time I heard of an instrumental hit was "Wipe Out" by The Ventures in 1963  . Well, there may be others but I'm hard pressed to find them. So perhaps Flamenco Road does merit an article by itself. The original CD jacket has 22 pages of notes, as well. It describes each piece, and so on. Kindly share your thoughts on this. As always, best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 08:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, I'll stew on all this. We don't want the article to get too top-heavy. What kind of audio cleanup do you have to do and how do you do it? I love Wipe-Out. I thought it was by the Surfaris? Is Laucke going to do the OTRS thing? Wow, 22 pages of notes! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:56, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Wipeout_(The_Surfaris_song_-_sample).ogg
@Checkingfax: That's it! It is the Surfaris . ...definitely a lapse in my pop culture. Catchy song, isn't it!
The article could stay more or less as is; we could move Flamenco Road to a new article, as is done for many music articles. For now, I'll upload the snooker video and a few other works in case we use them.
I haven't mentioned the OTRS thing because I still don't know what to advise on this; how do I proceed. By the way, something funny happened over at Commons. Remember the ruckus I caused and won my case some time ago. Well, I noticed a few files that were duplicates and asked for deletion. They were slated for deletion but the deletor backed down! So there are duplicate files still there probably because they didn't want any more ruckus. ...just kidding of course, but it's amusing nonetheless.
Regarding the audio software; as they say, you don't want to know! I have been playing with this stuff since I was a kid, and today, the state of the art software is a dream come true! I use forensic software. For audio that means iZotope. This means you don't only see the old waveform; you actually visually see the whole soundscape. You can work with photoshop-like tools in audio to highlight certain notes, visually! It's a whole new world of audio editing. You have many modules; you can get rid of hum, hiss, clicks, crackle, etc. in one click. One module will even separate noise from audio. All this within one edited track, not several tracks which would be standard fare. You can make old vinyl recordings sound as clean as a CD without the pops and scratches. For video, I use Sony Vegas Pro. It links up with your audio software to separate audio and video and then puts them back together when you're finished. So music software-wise, things are sure getting super interesting. So yes, the snooker video had lots of hum, usually due to electricity. ...had some hiss too. Then the DC offset had to be adjusted, but thankfully there was no clipping. I adjusted peak levels to a nice -3 db. Left-right channel balance was ok. I could go on, but I don't know how much you know about audio and video editing. But it was fun talking about this, since you opened the door  . best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I do have an interest. I've used Audacity a few times; used to use Wireshark and UDP loggers for getting under the hood of data packets. Used to have a Nagra. Did sound and lights at a church for 10 years. I could go on.
Poking around it looks like making a page devoted to an album is appropriate then you can link from Laucke's page using the:
{{main|album article name here}} template. Have you seen these templates:
{{infobox single}}, {{infobox song}}, {{infobox album}}, {{Track listing}}. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 13:20, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Very cool to learn about your background in music! ...very nice templates which I have bookmarked. Thank you! best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 09:48, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, Those are just infobox templates. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Yes, most are infoboxes, which will certainly came in handy. There is also the {{Track listing}} which will be useful too. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 09:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I found another template for you: {{Extra track listing}} to put in infoboxes. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 12:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Nice! ...duly bookmarked; thank you. I am about 40% through the French. After about 2 hours, an editor came along and caused an edit conflict - alas, 2 hours gone. It seems the French Wikipedia has about 1/20th of all the bells and whistles of the English one; ...sure glad I learned English  . Too bad the Stack isn't recognized. The French Media section is a total mess, but I'll figure it out. The inner working of the file has to have French names, and even then... ----Natalie.Desautels (talk) 13:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: PS. Aha; it was easy as pie. Whenever you go to a template page, you just click on the French link and all the info is there; ...all the new terms to use to make the template work in French. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 13:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Hm, media section is still a mess ... --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 14:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Audio and Video files uploaded

@Checkingfax:

We may not use the following audio and video files right away, but now we have them in Commons, duly licensed. The snooker video is there as well. As we say, vaya un trabajo (what a job!). I didn't include links to the atonal works. Even though I find them very interesting, they appeal to about .00001% of people, or some such thing. But you can find them categorized under Michael Laucke (The category was a very handy implementation you made)

On Laucke's user page on Commons, here, I see the OTRS notice and it says "The verification of the identity of this user account has been archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system.". So it was done after all, it would seem.

So all files are uploaded, and you will find them here:

AUDIO


VIDEO (I converted to .ogv from mp4)

Et voilà! meilleurs voeux, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, Mucho trabajo. Gracias. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 00:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Thanks! The expression is "Mucho trabajo, poco dinero"   ...fortunately not my case ...just following my heart ...   --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)


Amazon numbers (ASIN)

Natalie.Desautels, There is a template called {{ASIN}}. Connect the dots. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 14:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Checkingfax, there may be a template for them but Amazon numbers are inappropriate commercial links selling the item. As I said below, they should not be used as references, especially when non-commercial sources exist. The discography can be easily sourced from The Canadian Encyclopedia article(s) and OCLC numbers. Use those instead. Alternatively use the catalog number of the original recording company. Voceditenore (talk) 14:56, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Video clip

Natalie.Desautels, it would be dynamite if you could get Laucke to donate the video clip of him being interviewed at the pool hall to the Commons. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: I'm sure it would be easy enough. His office assistant Dave has been very friendly and forthcoming. ...will do tomorrow. I wonder what the time/size limit is for Commons' videos, and what format is needed. Btw, did you see the wonderfully precise edits done by User:Corinne .
I am about halfway through the French translation; ...curiously, even as a mother tongue, it's turning out to be harder than I thought due to all the grammatical rules. Spanish is more lax and should prove easier. I've been fixing up a small article on an amazing Montreal musician Sayyd Abdul Al-Khabyyr. He is inactive at 80 years old as he's had a stroke. He was Dizzy Gillespie's main man for a few years. The article was in bad shape - didn't even have a lead, so I fixed it up just a bit. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I have not reviewed all the edits that Corinne so expertly performed. I will say I read the lead and it really pops now. Did you notice the Laucke page has been viewed 6000 times in the past 30-days? which means if you deduct your 1000 page views that is still 5000 net page views. LOL. Some of Laucke's mentor pages only get 300 page views a month, some 3000 per month. The page you have launched is really doing well, IMHO. It's only been up for 6-weeks.
A tip about wikilinks to save you time: You don't need to pipe them, although taking out the underscores is good practice to avoid any potential of server parsing problems. So, this will work: [[Sayyd Abdul Al-Khabyyr]] without piping to the underscored version; in fact the underscored version in front of the pipe makes it more likely there will be a server parsing issue.
At least Sayyd Abdul Al-Khabyyr is still alive. Many of the musicians you've steered my way are already dead even at the age of 45.
Glad you got out of Paris before the dynamite went boom. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Yeah, I'm spending lots of time with my Parisian friends, understandably everyone is traumatized to various degrees. The tragic events were far from rue Saint-Honoré in the 10th arrondissement (district) where I was staying (I keep telling myself  ). Thanks for the good wishes.
Thank you for the information on the number of visits; that's very nice indeed! I think the reason there a fewer visits on Laucke's mentor pages is because they are strictly classical, which is a more limited market. ...forgot which tool gives you the page visits...
Thanks again for the wikilinks tip. I believe you mentioned it before, but, you know, so much to absorb and remember.
Yes, sadly many are gone, some to AIDS, like composer Brégent, designers Di Sant'Angelo and Halston and so on.
Btw, what can one do, if anything, about "editors" with only an ip address who come by and make changes that require hours of repair work. I guess the answer is nothing. LOL. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, Wow! Corinne really dug in.
  1. Video uploads are limited to 100MB per session but ...
  2. You can enable "chunked uploads" in your Commons Preferences to allow larger file uploads
  3. Preferred file format is: WebM but ...
  4. If already in .ogg file format do NOT convert to WebM format
  5. Link to video format converter
Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:58, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Yes, Corinne did some very subtle, respectful edits; ...such a delight!
The Commons Video Convert page says max file size for uploads is 20 GB!‍—‌amazing. The pool video in question is 165 meg in .mpg. I have already sent an email to Laucke's office (I'm becoming such a pest  )
The common formats of avi, mov, wmv, mp4 seem to be accepted
Wonder where we would place the video in the article...
best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I am surprised that Corinne did not have to shred things more   Yes, her editing was subtle but effective.
My research said WebM preferred, .ogg 2nd choice. Hmmm. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Cool. Since conversion is automatic, there are no concerns. When I get the video I will follow suit. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:32, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

How to perform page analysis

Natalie.Desautels, Do you have a page tab labeled "Tools"? If so, hover on that, then hover on Analysis, then pick an analysis tool (some don't work right‍—‌ so try them all). Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Many thanks! To get the info I wanted, I did Page / Analysis / Traffic Report. That led me to the result "Michael Laucke has been viewed 6261 times in the last 30 days. So now it is written in stone and I know where to go next time. à bientôt.   --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I thought you were giving me a French donut (benoit). LOL. Made me think of all the powdered sugar all over the place at Cafe' du Monde in the French Quarter of New Orleans. Funny to see limo drivers in black suits with white powder all over their suits and everybody sitting around drinking Chicory "coffee" with white powder around their nostrils. I found one of those tools was way off on editor contributions. Those stats are interesting too and there are about three tools that tally the editor stats. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: He, he. Boy, that's funny!   Many thanks! ...good to laugh  . very best, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 08:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

How to undo unhelpful edits easily

Natalie.Desautels, Go to the "Preferences" and enable "Twinkle". This will give you a "Rollback" option when you look at diffs (via a new set of three links). Be sure to pick the right rollback reason: AGF= Assume Good Faith to rollback accidental edits; the regular rollback is for plain vanilla rollbacks; VANDAL is for vandalism. It will rollback all sequentional edits. The rub is if there are edits after the questionable edits then you get blocked from doing a rollback. Sometimes I get reverted/rolled back even after intermediate edits‍—‌I don't know how they pull that off on me when I cannot do it to others. LOL. So, the answer to unhelpful edits is to catch them right after they happen then roll them back or "undo" them. "Undo" only undoes the very most recent edit.

The IP editor that made those edits acted in good faith. It was not vandalism. I don't know if the edits were improper. I'll research that. If you figure out how to undo historical edits out of sequence let me know. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: "edits after the questionable edits then you get blocked from doing a rollback". Yes, that's exactly what happened here. I'm not big on automation sometimes, like Find and Replace all (blindly). So in this case I redid each of the 20 or so edits one at a time. URLs were found in the First field, and lots of stuff upside down. Images were changed to display the page instead of the url, which rendered the Commons page with all the copyright info when I want the user to just enjoy the image without distraction. So I fixed all those configurations as well. I do believe they were made in good faith (the only way to go through life  ).
I simply use the undo feature right next to thank-you in View History. That undoes the particular user's edit only. Or were you asking something else? (getting cold here in eastern Canada and colds are going around, so my head is spinning a bit more than usual  ). --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:07, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, "undo" only undoes the most recent edit by an editor. It is a one shot deal as far as I know. I don't think you can go back more than one layer. That's my experience anyway.
Now, if you enable "Twinkle" in your Preferences you can undo a rafter of edits that were performed sequentially. Hit "Rollback" (pick one of the three Rollback links) and Twinkle will rollback all the sequential edits for that editor.
What I want to do is be able to pull out edits at random and undo them. Others have done it to me so I know it is possible but it never works for me. Rollback is a special feature you have to apply for but you get it "free" with Twinkle. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)


Consistent citations are required

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, One of the requirements for Good Article or Featured Article is to have consistent references. They should:

  • Be of one citation style only: Either plain text or template based
  • Fill in all possible parameters
  • Have a consistent date format (dmy, mdy, or ydm)

You picked dmy when you launched the article so that is the format we need to stick with. I found a lot of mdy and ydm dates today and many dates missing. I did not fill in any missing dates. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:16, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Thanks! I'll look into the missing dates immediately. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 08:10, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Hope all my edits were successful. Kindly have a look? ...got to rest up now. I don't require much sleep but right now "nature's sweet nurse" (Shakespeare) is welcome. Two references were not possible to get dates on:
1) This is a website with good information but no date as to when it was written
2) Thisis a library search with excellent information, but no date.
very best wishes, and all the blessings of life, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 13:15, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, It looks like you nailed it. The BG19Bot did some cleanup that I believe filled in any remaining holes. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Thanks! ...good to hear  . best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Civility

PS. I put some appropriate Userboxes on my talk page. including the Kindness Campaign ; most interesting. ...found some great articles on Wikipedia Civility.

Natalie.Desautels, Userboxes are fun, IMHO. Here is a gallery: Userboxes/Gallery. Also, go to the bottom of that page and un-hide the navbox for links to more groups of userboxes. PS: One userbox developer disappeared so I boldly updated his userbox and it transcluded to the thousands of people that display it. My update, although controversial to some, stuck. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:52, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Julian Bream technique original research

Question—I want to write a technical article, very technical ...called the Julian Bream technique. Laucke studied with him decades ago, and wrote down some 35 pages of Bream's very personal approach and highly intelligent insight into the classical guitar. I studied guitar as a side course in University; ...takes too many hours to play well but I do understand it well. These techniques have not been published anywhere except in a hand-written document that Laucke made available; I would decipher it. There are no copyright problems but all references would point to one document, so perhaps that's really boring. And I'm wondering about admissibility. Would this be considered new research? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 13:15, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, could you get a reliable source up there to document the notes and publish them? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:45, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Yes. Mr. Laucke studied with Bream at the Stratford Shakespearean festival in Ontario in 1969. He took down 35 pages of notes that would be unintelligible to a non classical guitarist, but which are invaluable; I found these. Bream is now old and not in great health, and it would be a pity for classical guitarists everywhere not to have this precious information transcribed and deciphered. To date, it does not exist anywhere and is unpublished. It was written day by day during the master classes that Laucke attended, and the Bream interpretation of how to play works by many important composers is clearly spelled out. The document is hand-written and has to be typed up and further explained. My concerns are that there is only one reference source; all information would be derived from the one had written source, so the references would be extremely thin, in fact, there is only one. Also, I am wondering if this type of project is considered original research and therefore not admissible by Wikipedia. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 18:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, interpreting an unpublished document would definitely be considered original research, and not suitable for a Wikipedia article. That doesn't mean it's not a worthwhile project. Ideas are not copyright, although attributing them to the originator is the ethical thing to do. On the other hand, notes, even hand written ones, are copyright. Perhaps Mr. Laucke will want to write a book about the topic, alone or in collaboration with Bream. If he did, or gave permission for someone else to write it from his notes, and if it was published by a publishing house with an editor, it would then be a reliable source that might be used in a Wikipedia article about Bream. If after that the book was reviewed in a reputable music magazine or newspaper, information about it could be added to Laucke's article. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax and Anne Delong: Thank you kindly for clarifications and confirming that the Julian Bream technique idea I had in mind would indeed be inadmissible under the "no original research" guideline. Hopefully Mr. Laucke will publish it some day; I know it would be of great interest to classical guitarists. Even the idea of adding a small sample to Julian Bream's page is not feasible as it is unpublished for now, so it could not be considered a reliable Wikipedia resource. If anyone wants to undertake this task with a publisher, the scanned original manuscript carries a CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication, all rights waived, so copyright should not be an issue, with the handwritten original attributed to Mr. Laucke, of course. ...hopefully someone can pick it up and it will see the light of day. Thanks again! kind regards, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 20:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Problem with quoted text not wrapping around audio file

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, Quoted text is not wrapping to right hand margin under the new embedded audio file in Style and influences section. It is a bug with the {{quote}} template which they have two workarounds for but #1 is N/A and #2 only works for a second. The bug is browser dependent so you might not see it. Do you see white space directly below the embedded audio file? Click on the template name to see the documentation. No big deal but it would nice if it would behave properly. I have submitted a trouble report to the Help desk. I am really enjoying the guitar solo of "Between Two Seas" in the Paco de Lucia section. Good call. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Unfortunately, I do see white space directly below the embedded audio file. It appears, as you described, in Chrome on all my machines (XP, Vista, Windows 7). It kind of makes the quote stand out; ...doesn't look too bad, but a fix would be nice, as you say. Glad you like "Between Two Seas". In a French newspaper, it says that Paco composed it in Laucke's loft in New York. It is actually a rumba/flamenco, that is to say, a mixture of these two forms. It is rumored that Paco invented this style which became a world-wide standard. When I can find a moment to get a good ref, I'll include this info. ...such a cool rhythm.
I am making progress on the French translation in my sandbox. Do you think I can use English refs, or should all these be translated too? English refs might not be too useful to a uni-lingual French speaker. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:37, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I totally enjoy imagining Laucke picking at the guitar strings then strumming them rigorously during "Between Two Seas". I enjoy the technical aspects of what he is doing there. I heard a good guitarist the other night from five feet away plucking away. He was only doing The Beatles but his finger work was amazing on the frets. His voice was pretty good too. He said he could do any Beatles song. LOL.
Of course French refs would be preferred but English ones are OK. If the sources are in English there's no need to do any translation.
Getting back to posters too: If you look at a poster, take some temporary notes until you get to your computer or phone as to the publisher and some dates, then you can put the poster in your own words and reference the location, the date you saw it, the date it was printed, who printed it, and whatever metadata you can glean. Same with signs. They are both valid references. Plus DVD and album liners and notes. Same things.
@Checkingfax: I would be amiss not to mention what an excellent tip this is! Thank you kindly. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 08:15, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
The white space just annoyed me because that's not the way the quote template is supposed to behave. LOL. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:58, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Editor Edoker did some tweaking and got the white space to go away. I think I put the workaround in the wrong place. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:16, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Indeed, I noticed editor Edoker did some excellent edits, and of course I thanked appropriately. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 08:07, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Rolando Valdes-Blain missing from body

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, Rolando Valdes-Blain is missing from the body of the article. You can use this reference to research him:[1] Remember to restore any diacritics when you mention him in the body. The lead has him listed with diacritics.

References

  1. ^ "Classical guitarist Rolando Valdes-Blain dies". The Washington Times. Associated Press. April 8, 2011. Retrieved 12 October 2015.

Once you add some copy about him in the body, hang this named reference on it:
<ref name="Rolando Valdes-Blain" /> and it will pull the reference up from the LDR that is already in place: i.e.- there is no need to reduplicate the entire ref again.

PS: I moved all the references out of the lead and created an LDR area in the References section. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikiquotes of Laucke

Natalie.Desautels, when you get caught up [[Wikiquote]] is accepting quotes for their depository. That way all the quotes you've researched won't be lost if somebody deletes them down the road. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Wow, interesting once again; many thanks. I do keep offline backup copies in text files... kind regards, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Paco de Lucia sub-section

@Checkingfax: I have been working hard behind the scenes on gathering material for the [[Paco de Lucia sub-section]], under Style; I have about 20 references. ...should be up soon; somehow it's hard to organize. (chaotic flamenco? :) Also, I changed Early life to Early career because that what it is. I am also working on an Early life section, which you inspired weeks ago, but which I resisted. I think it's a good idea ...a lot going on there. Would you kindly look into the six references in the last sentence under Early career; I believe you are able to make them into one.

  • Natalie.Desautels, I made six in to one with the {{refn}} template. If you click on it you can read the documentation which is horribly unclear and makes the template sound very limited (you can't use ref names, or spaces I believe). But I have my hack around it. Ref [40] is now a portal to the other six refs.

Yes, I did have fun translating over at Wikidata :) Thank you. I am eager to make progress with the translations of this article, at least into French and Spanish, when it stabilizes a bit more.

  • I envy your multilingualism. Stability will come soon.
  • There was a 250 character limit on descriptions at Wikidata, so that's why I clipped it to that. You can edit it, if you'd like. I just took the first 250 from your lead.

All you recent edits were great. Sorry I put some of the section descriptions back; I think it's clearer.

  • I slashed them because the TOC was a metre wide and it felt top-heavy sitting over your article, so I slimmed it down. The TOC is just a snapshot of what's coming up. Just one line below the longest entry in the TOC the body of the article basically said the same thing so it was redundant, IMHO.

I felt "Contributions" almost sounded monetary, and needed to be expanded to include guitar repertoire. Kindly share your thoughts on this?

  • I would clip it because the first sentence says all that.

best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:50, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T117527
Resolved
  • I did some other junk other at Wikidata and the Commons. One thing, at Wikidata I tried to add the Laucke surname but it stalled at Lauck and won't let me remove it. I filed a report with Phabricator.
Natalie.Desautels, Update: I "added an item" to Wikidata (Laucke as a family-name or surname) and then was able to get Laucke on the drop-down menu in Laucke's main Wikidata record to add his correct surname. You can further translate his surname here. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:10, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
  • I created a "gallery" on the Commons and when I was about done some Narc deleted everything except the file names. Fortunately I only had about 20 minutes in to it. I've built it back up and you can add to it. A "gallery" is a place to show off images with captions, and you can have sections, and text. "Categories" only allow you to tag files with the category and nothing else. Taqging a file by category is easier than adding to a gallery, but you can do both. I'm saying file because it can be audio, visual, or image. Here is a link to the gallery. You can edit it too.
  • I signed up for a MusicBrainz.com account and linked his data to his Wikipedia page. Check it out. Go to his Authority Control and click on the MusicBrainz link on the [[Michael Laucke]] page. I added some other demographic data at MusicBrainz too. If you sign up for a free account you can edit his profile too. The edits go through some kind of peer review process. I made four edits, one was auto approved and three went to peer review. There was a checkbox to rev up that process but I declined. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Wow, that's fantastic ("fantastique" in this part of the world :). I'm excited to check these things out later today. I was amazed at Wikidata!
Forgot how to do a dummy edit, so I'll answer here. In Spanish, it is "de" lowercase (it means from the mother Lucia), in her honor.
Indeed, the de Lucia section does seem to be taking time, but references to de Lucia together with Laucke are scattered among so many scanned newspaper interviews. It's time-consuming because most are not OCRed, and are simple images. So you have to read and type a lot to get to the desired info. ...will be forthcoming
"got rid of red watermarked text by linking to cropped image instead"; much better! Thanks so much.
Regarding the " (Early career: - refn - to combine refs)" - - - that's excellent! I tried to delete the bullets to have the refs line up horizontally, but no cigar :) very best wishes, renewed thanks --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 12:02, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, To dummy edit you just need to change something in the article like put a space between the equal signs and the text in a heading. It won't render, but it will allow you to make an edit/save. Or you can add a line break after a heading (but if there's two then it will show). You can add a space after an equal sign in a reference, or remove a space if one is already there. That will qualify as a dummy edit. You can't do a null edit, it has to be a dummy edit (something that won't render).
It's Vincent van Gogh, but if you just use van Gogh, then you have to use Van Gogh instead. It's Vincent van Gogh, but it's the Van Gogh Museum. If you start out a sentence with van Gogh, it's Van Gogh. If you use van Gogh in the middle of a sentence, it's Van Gogh. It's a Dutch thing. Didn't know if it applied to Spanish names like de Lucia. If you start a sentence with de Lucia is it de Lucia or De Lucia? Hmmm.
I think I got the ref numbers to line up horizontally once. I'll revisit that.
Highbeam.com only has two reference articles on Laucke. One is a snippet from a union gig he did for his music union. The other is the Canadian Encyclopedia. As for de Lucia, Highbeam.com has 457 archived articles. JSTOR.com has zip on either one. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 12:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Thanks for the update. Btw, what is a Narc ? kind regards, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 08:22, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, Narc literally is short for Narcotics Officer, but has become a colloquialism for somebody who sticks their nose in to other peoples business when maybe they should go make some popcorn instead. Somebody narcing you turns you in to authority figures for a scolding, or they imply so. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:39, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Oh. I get it. Hm, I like the bit about the popcorn though :) --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Checkingfax:. Thanks for your recent edits and all your hard work. Please don't spend any time on the Paco de Lucia section. Behind the scenes I have been working hard on this too, and have developed a short, interesting section on the Laucke/de Lucia relationship with about 10 very solid references; I'll probably use about five of them. (I wanted to write to you yesterday but got too tired.)

Also, I found more very reliable sources through a 5 day marathon radio interview called Morningside with "Mr. Canada" Peter Gzowski; the interviews lasted two hours each day for 5 days, broadcast nation-wide; ...lots of material about Laucke's life, the snooker and MAF included. So I'll be taking care of at least the Paco section later this evening and hope to finish it.

In other areas, thanks to the great tools you sent my way, I have been able to contribute to several other pages, in classical music mainly on violinists, pianists, classical guitarists. I did find 2 articles that were perfect (Glenn Gould), but most needed various tweaks and fixes. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 00:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, I just put enough in Paco's section to make a tie in to Laucke albeit a weak one so there was a connection rationalizing the need for the section.
Wow, ten hours of radio!
When I use reFill, I don't click on the reFill main link: I click on the superscript(options) link instead. Then I uncheck the box that is 2nd from the bottom, and check the box that is 3rd from the bottom, leaving the bottom box checked. Then I press the FIX button. This dresses the refs nicely. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:27, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Paco de Lucia sub-section : ya esta terminado! (finished)

  Done

@Checkingfax: Howdy. ...just wanted to give you a heads up–finished the Paco de Lucia sub-section. It took quite some time to translate the French and Spanish. I'm happy with the result. I think @Mathglot: will be too. The section may seem a bit long, but, de Lucia is the Bruce Lee of the guitar, after all. He changed many musicians' lives. Now he's gone (this year) and he passed on the secrets of his art to Laucke and others ...so maybe the length is justified. It's not much longer than other sections, though. hasta pronto! Thanks. very best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 13:02, 10 November 2015 (UTC) @Checkingfax: ...Thanks for fixes. I will work on the flow of the English translation later today. Also, the interspersing of newspaper quotes with what Laucke said in interview is confusing. ...will fix as well. PS. first time commenting from smart phone :) --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 07:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Where is the .flac for Michael Laucke

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, The .flac for Michael Laucke seems to be a dead link? Not searchable on The Commons either. Please advise. The .flac for Stephen Fry works great. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:04, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Got it! Many thanks! I have the .wav we need and converted it to .flac. Works fine; thanks for configuring the infobox. I mentioned that Wikipedia is doing an article on Mr. Laucke and his office sent this 7 sec recording to me! ...easy peezy; hope the copyright is ok. best, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 09:47, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Current .flac for Laucke

Hi Natalie.Desautels. I think the MoS for audio in infoboxes is 7-seconds max (name, residency, occupation).

The new .flac is random and runs on. I think it should be expanded, explained, and moved to the Media section and the old .flac restored to the infobox. JMHO. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 17:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Thank you kindly. I'll restore the old .flac later tonight. I think I can find something better though, such as talk during an interview that imparts a tidbit of information/insight into the classical guitar, the interpretation of its music, and so on. I've found these sort of voice clips more interesting than just someone's voice announcing who they are, but it's true that even just hearing that special voice timbre that makes us unique is interesting too. An option would be to cut it down to 7 seconds, as you suggested. Clint's voice id .flac is 20 seconds, but after all, he is "the man"! I have hours and hours of talk in the Gzowsky interviews, so, well, lots to wade through to find the gem. But I can just click around in the .wav file in iZotope (amazing music editing software) where you can actually "see" where the human voice appears, as distinct from the music waveform; these interviews contain both playing and talk. iZotope is a (relatively) new breed of incredible forensic software where you see the soundscape, not only the wave. It allows you to delete a single harmonic in the final mix—no need to have the actual tracks! Hm, got carried away again ...kindly excuse. See ...passion consumes...  . all my very best, natalie Natalie.Desautels (talk) 22:45, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Adding authority control for Michael Laucke

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, Do you know what the authority control values are for Michael Laucke? Here is the format (only MusicBrainz is correct):

{{Authority control|PND=123640431|LCCN=no/98/78014|MusicBrainz=d8c57a60-5f44-4c0c-aa8e-aaf252068175|VIAF=66639106|TSURL=Michael Laucke}}

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:04, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, Found out how to populate Authority Control: We add the data to Wikidata and it transcludes. We put a generic and empty {{authority control}} template above the {{DEFAULTSORT:}} template in Laucke's article and that's it. Wikidata takes care of the details. here is the link to fill out the fields. Click on "add" at the bottom of the filled out ones, then type in the first few letters of the type of field you want to add. Then enter the data, and the first time you have to click on a "agree to terms and conditions" link– but after that the link won't come up again. Then click on "save" and move on to the next field you want to add. On the Commons you do it by hand. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 03:07, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Got it! Many thanks! I entered some data in the language sections. Wikidata and :Authority control were an interesting read; thank you kindly... best, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 09:30, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Adding modules to the infobox

Signature module

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, I tried to use module= and embed=yes to nest another infobox inside the current one and add Laucke's signature to the infobox but I could not get it to work, so I moved a generic infobox-person outside of the main infobox, it works, and it looks decent, IMHO. I'm going to talk to the Template-Editors about making signature= a regular parameter for infobox-musical-artist. Those templates are locked for normal editing. I've edited a lot of other important templates but I guess this one is too important for us peons. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 10:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: That's great! I was about to give up on this one (contrary to my nature). From what I had studied and analyzed, I concluded that each type of infobox had it's structure. But I never thought of adding one outside of the main infobox. Great find; I imagine we're within Wikipedia protocol. Thanks so much. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, using the "module=" parameter in the infobox-musical-artist you can nest up to 4 more infoboxes (using the module=, module2=, module3=, and module4= parameters). Other infoboxes use a parameter named embedded= for adding nested infoboxes. For the embedded infobox you set an embed= parameter to embed=yes. It actually gets funky because each infobox has a title line. It would be nice if title lines were suppressed for nested infoboxes. I think articles are limited to 3 separated infoboxes but if they're nested you can go beyond that. I tried putting another infobox outside on another article recently and the added infobox was wider than the primary one and it looked funky, plus it had an ugly extra, off-topic heading. Signature is not a parameter that is written in to the infobox-musical-artist template code. I'll ask one of the Template-Editors to add it and maybe they will. Too bad we can't have generic parameters that we can customize. They have to be hardcoded in to the template code on the backend. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:11, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax:...generic parameters that we can customize—now that would be nice. I figured it was hard-coded a while ago, but thought I might be able to get around it. Not much chance seeing as the language—Lua—is not one I know. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 11:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Audio module

  Done

@Checkingfax: I guess we can add a module for the short audio too ...--Natalie.Desautels (talk) 11:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Using named refs more than once

Natalie.Desautels, look down the page for several comments I've added. Here's the latest: Once you name a ref like this you can't use the same name on another ref. In that diff you duplicated the ref name twice without putting a closing forward slash in the 2nd use, and on the 2nd use you duplicated the whole ref contents. The point of named refs is you only need to fill out the content once. Just delete the 2nd ref content, but keep the name portion of the ref and add a forward slash to the end of it like this:
<ref name="Bravo Network - number one on video charts" />

I like to put a space before the slash. Your mileage may vary. Looking good! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: I understand perfectly. Indeed, when I run reFill, it picks up this error, which I have unfortunately done repeatedly in expressing references. The correct procedure is easy enough to understand but I guess I'm doing too many operations at a time. I do appreciate however that you've had the kind patience to mention this at least 4 times now! ...kindly excuse. I do have programming skills—asp, asp.net, php (oops, I forgot to mention good old DOS)—so the concept should be easy. I'll have to focus more. This is like those spelling mistakes I keep making, which you then correct; I know the correct spelling but ...just working too fast I guess. I usually run reFill and if there are no red errors, I assume all is fine and I move on to the many other tasks at hand. By the way, I just finished adding a Filmography table; took quite some time but it's all formatted nicely so no need to go get help. Now I'll move onto your other comments --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:07, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Can now categorize images to Category:Michael Laucke

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, I created a category on Commons titled: Category:Michael Laucke. When an image is added that category can be selected and then the image will appear on the category gallery page. For existing images, go to each image, go to bottom, and add to Michael Laucke category using HotCat, or manually. While at it, can add image to other cogent categories. If you click on "+" sign instead of on "OK" button you can bulk add categories without having to save and wait for each one. Once you do the bulk save you can scroll down in the edit window and alphabetize them if that strikes your fancy.

Use this search string to find Laucke's images, click on each one, scroll to bottom and see if it's in any categories.

Also, the page is multilingual for the introduction. If you click on "edit" you can add an introductory blurb in each language after the "=" sign. There are more language parameters that can be added if needed. Cheers!

PS: Notice above for external links to sister projects I stripped off the "https:" ... that's the way they want us to do it. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Wow; it just keeps getting more and more interesting! I just spent some time understanding categories. Thank you so much for this guidance and also for completing so many category entries. I completed assigning categories for all the images. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I used Jennifer Aniston's category page as a template and went from there. I tried to do it before by reading the instructions but it made no sense. I still don't understand the advantage of having a "page" vs. having a "category". I like the category concept but I don't know what the "page" concept adds yet. If you figure it out, let me know. At least we've got a leg up in the Commons now. PS: Jen's "page" page redirects to her "category" page. I put Laucke's category-page in to a lot of categories so when folks search on categories his images will come up too. Not that that will help us. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 10:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I just schooled myself on page/gallery vs. category on the Commons: you tag all your media with a category tag but you just put your best stuff on your page/gallery. Plus on the page/gallery you can add captions, notes, headings, etc. With categories it's just a big lump of everything. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Oh, I see ...I think : ). Also, if you click on an image, you can click "Add a note" right onto the photo, and other editing possibilities. In other areas, might I again have your thoughts on the discussion with Anne_Delong here,in blue. She has some very good points, but I think I should take my time, collect various points of view and then use the best ideas. best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Suggest wikilinking pieces and works if possible

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, The first instance of each piece or work mentioned in the body of the article should be wikilinked. They can be wikilinked again if they also appear in a table. The consensus is that repeated wikilinks are OK in tables, even though that is contrary to the normal wikilinking guideline. The wikilink can also be duplicated in the lead. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: I think the article is a bit weak in implementing this procedure. I'll have to go over it with a fine tooth comb, and unlink offending repeats, except for tables, as you say. Thanks very much; ...much appreciated. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I combed it and only found two dupes. You've done a good job of not overlinking. But, IMHO, you should try and wikilink all the pieces and works in the tables. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 10:51, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Good. I actually deleted wikilinks in tables following the first instance method. Good to know that tables can have repeated wikilinks. I'm on it! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 11:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, the school of thought is that if somebody is reading the table they can quickly click on links without having to scan the article for them, or use the wikisearch. I used to strip them out, but then I got schooled. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Just completed adding numerous wikilinks in all three tables. Thanks for the tip; makes perfect sense. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 11:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Peer review

Natalie.Desautels, Should I request a live [[WP:PR]] Peer Review for this article? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-automated peer review

Natalie.Desautels, this semi-automated PR does not replace a live one:

  • The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.[?]
  • Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.[?]
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: couldn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Page stats and edit counts

Natalie.Desautels

  • Found 171 edits by Natalie.Desautels on Michael Laucke (53.27% of the total edits made to the page)
  • Found 131 edits by Checkingfax on Michael Laucke (40.81% of the total edits made to the page)
  • Found 3 edits by GrammarFascist on Michael Laucke (0.93% of the total edits made to the page)

Hmmm... 5% MIA.

  • Michael Laucke has been viewed 1054 times in the last 30 days.

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Create table borders for 3rd table

  Done

I feel that this section would benefit from borders in the table to harmonize with the other tables on the page. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 05:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: I totally agree. I think this table used to have a border at its inception; ...don't know how it got this way. But yes, for sure. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Oh, good idea about the suggestion box. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:04, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
To put that table right, I imagine I would use [ {| class="wikitable" style="font-size:95%" ] like the other tables? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
I've never played with tables. There is a table expert at the Teahouse Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 23:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax:I have an idea on how to fix the table. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Create lead

  Done

Click here for a helpful tool to create a lead for your article. Right now Laucke's article is a narrative that lacks a summary lead. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 23:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: That's such a good bit of advice! In your source, I found the Table for development section just a really great tip! I am eager to sink my teeth into this. Thanks again ...just great! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax:The lead has been started in my sandbox, here. ...just to let you know. It is in the very, very, very rough first stages. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:47, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, [[WP:BETTER]] is another Wikipedia essay on lead creation. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Adding more freely licensed images to the article

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, image wikicode is still in view-source but rem'd out so images don't render on the page for now. You can remove the rem code at your pleasure. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 00:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax:Thanks again for your meticulous work, as always. I have to attend to some family matters for the next few days. I won't be able to contribute as much as I would wish during this time, but will be back at full galop after this brief period. ...just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your input. I have to get up early today, but will try to put in some quality time right now. best, Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, the article was visited by the BGW19bot a little while ago and it made 9 wee changes. Two of them I disagree with. Enjoy your time off. Ping me when you get back. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 05:44, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax:Can I see these "9 wee changes"? What is your opinion on removing the rem code? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:24, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Hm, I wonder what the risk is; ...a delicate issue it seems. I was reading several talk pages about the photos I want to use; seems there was a misunderstanding in that they were slated for possible deletion based on the belief that they were "not photos owned by Michael Laucke but claimed as so". Turns out that the photos are all perfectly legal uploads (not the newspaper scans though) and Wikimedia commons has now identified Laucke as the owner. Almost all photos seem to be a "work for hire" which were paid for and all rights acquired. The discussion has been going on since september 29; Wikimedia now knows that Laucke is the owner of these. I dont know how long these discussions usually last. Do you think it's best to obstain from using them for now. Too bad, I really liked the way they looked on the page. You mentioned about a bot possibly deleting everything if it finds one of these photos; is that really a likelihood? What to do ...alas, so bare without the colorful photos... --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, then remove the the rem codes.
If you go to page-history and find the bot entry with a comment about 9 fixes then click on the diff to eyeball them. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 06:34, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Much as I would love to, I cant bring myself to remove the rem codes. I mean, you have much more experience than me, so I'd like to wait for your judgement on how to proceed. If you want to leave the rem codes in place until Wikimedia Commons decides, I would also concur. Thanks! very best wishes, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 07:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Where are the control codes

  Done

Natalie.Desautels, When removing "control codes" I understand why Ost316 removed the extra line break above the template, but I don't see the control code in the musicians category in this diff. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 21:45, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Italicizing works and major pieces, putting "songs" and "minor pieces" in quotes

  Done

Question: Natalie.Desautels, In the (now with pretty borders thanks to editor Bgwhite) table that has a column labeled "work" should the column label "work" be changed to "piece"? And, are any of the column items "major" pieces, or are they all "minor" pieces? Major pieces or works should be italicized and minor pieces should be in "quotes". Albums go in italics, songs go in "quotes". From reading the title names I cannot tell which ones are major or minor, especially the ones in French. What is a "work" anyway? Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 20:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Table looks great! In classical music, a musical piece is usually called a work, as in a work of art, or a musical work. In popular music, you often hear expressions like a Beatles tune, a good piece, and so on. It would sound a bit unusual to me to refer to Beethoven's 5th Symphony, for example, as a good piece, although it's not unthinkable; it is properly a good work, or good musical work. We should change the title to Musical work.
Regarding major works , indeed, some of the column items are "major" works. I just arrived in Paris with my family, so after I rest up a bit, I will attend to making major works italicized and minor works in "quotes" .
Also, I intend to contact StarryGrandma , the fellow who has copyright expertise, and inquire about using links to Flickr photos. Wikipedia uploads (not Commons) says there are no less than 7 possible legal ways to use photos from this service. The 5 photos I wanted to use are all available there.
And, I found your tip about Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section immensely interesting, so much so that I spent the whole transatlantic flight studying it offline. I've begun to build the recommended Table for development. My goal is to make the best Wikipedia contribution, in style as well, now that I am starting to understand Wikipedia's mission. I want to create a lead/main article balance fully respecting Wikipedia's stylistic goals. I have looked over a few other Wiki classical guitar articles; I personally find them interesting of course, but as far as style , most hardly follow the MOS at all, especially in the area of leads. I will develop my new lead section in the sandbox, and ping you to learn your reaction. Thanks as always; I am finding Wikipedia an amazing experience! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 09:30, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Making sure all quote marks are logical quotation marks

  Done

Putting full stops in the correct place regarding quotes: Do you know all about logical quotations (WP:LQ)? I'm still ramping up on all the nuances of that WP:MOS. Enjoy Paris. Cheers! ...Checkingfax ( Talk ) 22:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Wow, that was interesting! ...just finished reading up on logical quotations. This is something I wondered about; years ago an English literature friend of mine gave me a general rule but now I see that it's more intricate, much more. So thanks for the great link.
I like the 

---- between suggestions; I know horizontal rule in php and now in Wiki Markup (wikitext) as well.; it adds clarity, to be sure.

Paris is ...old, but beautiful. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, I used wikimarkup ---- to shortcut to an HR. PS: I was surprised that HTML tag <center> worked in the infobox for Laucke's image caption. Many times HTML tags will break an infobox. At least you can speak and write French. Cheers! ...Checkingfax  ( Talk ) 04:05, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: PhP can be pretty powerful, after all Google uses it. I'm actually what we call in Frech "Polyglote", or multiligual; I have a few mother tongues and it doesnt make much difference to me. I like to help people understand each other. When people ask me about the languages, I tell them "that's why I'm always confused". : ) I'm making some good progress. I have a lead proposition waiting in the wings that I am eager to show to you. I guess my sandbox is a good place when my new lead is presentable. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Embed audio clip of Laucke into infobox
  Done

Natalie.Desautels, How about putting an .ogg/.oga audio snippet of Laucke in the article as part of the Wikipedia:Voice intro project? See: [1], [2], [3]. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}}{Talk} 22:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: That's a very interesting suggestion! At Stephen Fry there is a good example of the voice but also something else kind of special - the signature! I have come to learn that both Segovia and Laucke sign their names in the form of a guitar. Segovia uses the S to emulate the curvaceous sides of the guitar, while Michael uses the handwritten M. I know I can find the signature but for the voice, I'll have to initiate a personal request. That's fine; I'm not shy. So this is another very good suggestion that I have placed on my To-Do list. I just hope I don't have to spend time battling Commons again when both audio and image are uploaded (but perhaps I shouldn't say that as I do understand why). Merci! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 23:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, The audio clip is cool. I've seen the sig in infoboxes before like for Bill Clinton, or Bill Gates. I created a new page for [[Stephen Fry]] titled [[Stephen John Fry]] (it's a redirect to John Fry). Here's the entire page content:


#REDIRECT [[Stephen Fry]]



{{R from birth name}}

{{R to shorter name}}



The first line creates the redirect;


The 2nd line is blank;


The 3rd and 4th line categorizes the redirect (these are "hidden" redirect categories). Each redirect can be in up to 7 redirect categories (but never in article categories). I enjoy finding redirects to create, and then the redirect categories to put them in (there are only a handful of parent-categories for redirects, and at this time only one child-category (plants). I'll create one for Laucke with a potential misspelling and categorize it as such (R from misspelling). OK, the [[Michael Lucke]] article is now live as a redirect. If you click on that link it will take you to the Michael Laucke page, then go to the top of the Laucke page and you will see a "redirected from ..." link, click on that and you'll see the redirect article I easily created.
If Laucke emails a release to the VoiceProject there won't be any trouble. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}}{Talk} 00:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax:Amazing! ...so simple and so effective. The misspellings I've seen most (or made myself) are, first of all "Locke". This is because we hear Mr. Laucke on English CBC radio and the host pronounces it, correctly, as "Lock", like a door lock. So I guess people think of the writer John Locke. Other common misspellings are "Lauk" and very popular is "Lauke" - - - leaving out the "c" is very common. So I guess I can try my hand at creating these 4 other redirect pages; ...seems simple enough. Thanks again. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 02:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)


...just saw the work you did on Stephen John Fry ...nice! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The way I create redirects is I go to the page name first, like Michael Laucke; then I change the name in the browser address bar to say for instance Michael Luck (with underscores); hit enter; it takes me to a "that page does not exist" page; then I click on "create page" and it takes me to the page edit window; be sure you're typed in the right name in the browser address bar because that will become the new article name; type in the redirect wikicode and the target page name; move down two lines and type in the category templates (like R from birth name, R from misspelling, R from diacritics, R to diacritics, R to nickname, R from initialism, R from capitalization, etc.); click on PREVIEW and make sure it looks right before you click on SAVE; then click on the bold link to make sure it goes to the right page; it should. here are the redirect templates: {{R template index}}; here's a list of cite templates: {{quicktemplates}}  Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}}{Talk} 02:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Thanks for such a clear explanation! I got them all except one! I created new pages making a Redirect from misspelling on Lock, Lauke, and Lauk, the most common last name mistakes. Michael Locke already exists, so I think I need a disambiguation page, perhaps. I reflected on what to do on the [[Michael Locke]] page, but I dont want to mess it up. As I've seen done, I was wondering if the right protocol would be to put this on top of Locke's page


[ "Michael Locke may also refer to:

  • Michael Laucke (guitarist) (born 1947), Canadian classical and flamenco guitarist, known for "Flamenco Road" and "Spanish Guitar Stories"" ]


...à votre santé! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 13:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, If you want to play rough, go to your Gadgets in Preferences and enable Twinkle. It's a good tool for issuing Welcomes, but you can also use it to easily create a Speedy Delete Nomination for that shallow Locke page. Just go to the page and then click on the TW drop-down menu on your upper toolbar tabs near where the "Move" tab is. I think it's the CSD choice on the pull-down menu when you hover on the TW. You did a perfect job with the Redirects -- you didn't have to go back and repair them like I do sometimes (I stumble and use a curly brace for a bracket or visa-versa). If Locke's page is deleted you can commandeer it as another redirect. I edited some WP main pages today. Kinda scary. A [[WP:HATNOTE]] would work on the Michael Locke page for now, but make it a wee bit shorter than your proposal. Do you know the various Hatnote formats? Here's one example: {{for|the Canadian classical/flamenco virtuoso guitarist|Michael Laucke}}. It won't let you append the birth date to the end because his name becomes the last thing and it is a wikilink to his article and it self inflates with other words and punctuation (commas, periods, and such). There are other prepackaged Hatnote styles, or you can start with a blank Hatnote slate. You inspired BullRangifer to do some heavy editing on the [[WP:LEADCREATE]] article yesterday. An article I contributed to went [[WP:GA]] tonight: [[Monica Geller]]. Everybody is voting on a new logo to celebrate the 5,000,000th article that is coming up soon (only about 10,000 articles to go. I added a [[template]] to make a counter and then another link to make that counter link to a table of statistics. Follow that link and see the counter, and vote on a logo. I added a [[WP:THQ]] shortcut to the template that serves the welcome banners at the Teahouse so now visitors can have a handy way to get back to the Teahouse. I floated it on the Talk page but got no traction so I just poked around and did it, per be BOLD. I did some other stuff too. Did I answer all your questions? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}}{Talk} 14:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the corrections of some oversights on my part. ( I don't think I am completely over the jet lag, if that's any excuse : )


That dummy edit sure is a neat way to send a little SMS without disturbing anything! Many thanks. Yes, it is Manhattan New York, or New York City.


I like the od code! Well, I wouldn't want to disturb the article on Michael Locke, now that I see how much really hard (but exhilarating) work goes into creating one. The best idea is the hatnote; I'll have to study up  ...always a learning curve, n'est-ce pas? {{for}} might work as I wish; a blank Hatnote slate might get me the desired redirect also.


Indeed, the outcome of the copyright battle was positive; ...gotta fight for everything in this life : ). I got a barn star from the peson who originally asked for that Andres Segovia photo to be deleted. The final result is here, at the bottom. "Hedwig in Washington" apologized, which I felt was very honorable.


GrammarFascist suggested that Mr. Laucke should participate in creating an OTRS ticket for this image, so that it doesn't happen again, since "Commons is populated with many users who prefer to tag images for deletion when there is any conceivable cause for doubt". Personally I think the copyright issue is misunderstood. It is expensive to sue people, and usually one doesn't spend good money going after bad; by this I mean you sue when someone makes a profit from an illegal copy of anything. What is the liklihood that a photo during a PBS film shoot has any significant monetary value? I have many thoughts on this, and quite a lot of experience in the matter, but ..later, I guess.


Congratulations on the contribution to the Monica Geller article, and the WP:GA; boy, that's some fine article, if I may say so! ...write soon ...back to the grind : ) best wishes, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, go ahead and put a template {{hatnote}} on the Locke article. It will be enough. Yes, even stub articles are harder than one would expect to create. If I had edit warred with Editor changedforthebetter it would have deflated her efforts to get a GA approval on Monica Geller. The GA examiner (Editor Cirt) gave me props for my cooperation. {{od}}'s are cool, IMHO, especially if you have to add some code or blockquotes below existing comments. Another template I like is {{USD}}. And to add an apostrophe s on to an italicized word you can enclose the 3rd apostrophe in four curly braces like this: {{'}} so it does not confuse the wikitext parser. I also like to pipe possessive names so the 's is inside the wikilink so the 's is not red while the name is blue. OCD I guess. You can put s, ed, ing, ed and so forth outside the wikilink and they will become part of the link but the code gods under the hood at the Wikimedia Foundation have not seen to treating 's outside the wikilink the same way. Good job on the barnstar. I got some cheeseburgers early on. Kudos for winning the copyright ruckus. You forgot to sign your post above. Check out my next post below. The BOT is making a mistake, IMHO. Rambling on. Enjoy Paris. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:15, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Find image file of Laucke's signature and add to infobox
  Done

@Checkingfax: I found a Michael Laucke signature image in jpg. It was already lo-res, so when i converted it to .svg it was even worse. I'm looking for a hi-res.
Btw, thanks for the neat headings; much easier to navigate than our original numbers idea, although it served our purpose at the time.

best, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 01:58, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, can you try posting it in .jpg? I see a lot of .jpg in infoboxes. Cheers!

@Checkingfax: Good to know. The file is only 10K, but I can post it just to see if I can get the signature working. I want to find a better res.


Btw, I have a silly question. After hundreds of edits, do I always have to ping you for you to receive notification, or does just answering you on my talk page notify you if you have my talk page on your watchlist.--Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:41, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, The only auto-ping is if you post on *my* Talk page. Then you don't have to ping me. I used to have my email set up to be notified of every edit on my Watchlist but I got snowed and disabled it. I wish we could subscribe to pages individually for pings. As it is my Watchlist gets overwritten if there is more than one edit before I read it. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:49, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: OK, no email-like "Reply" button; wouldn't that be nice : ). ...makes sense though. Thanks for the info. meilleur voeux (best wishes) --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Ref error needs fixing
  Done

See this diff. I don't know which ref data to put in there. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:54, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

It reads ok. 
</ref> Exploration<ref name=":13">World premiere (October 26, 1983) Carnegie Hall
 is right. It say reference number 13, but the actual reference number is 40. I don't understand the numbers. What reference data do you need to know? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 05:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, Need to know which citation goes with that name (ref name=":13"). The way I back track refs is to search the graphical interface for [40] (with the braces) and then pick out some nearby text, then do a view-source, find the text under the hood, then the ref, then fix it. In this case ref name=":13" needs a citation to follow it, or the ref name needs to be changed to one that is in use or add a citation to it. When you name a ref tag, you have to follow it right off with a citation, and then after the citation you have to follow it up with a closing /ref tag. You opened a named ref, but never provided the citation nor the closing /ref tag. Named refs can be self closing if they are the 2nd use of the name. I think the named ref :13 got fixed here in the meantime somehow. Have you enabled Proveit yet? Handy tool. It's in Gadgets. [40] means it's the 40th unique ref in the article. If you add one before it, it will change to [41], and if you add one after it, it will stay at [40]. The only way to keep the numbers static is to do [[WP:LDR]] (List Defined References). Do a view source here. They're kind of fun once you catch on. Clear as mud? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, a stand-alone named ref that opens and closes itself is: <ref name=":13" /> (that works for a ref that has already been named. The first time you name a ref it has to be a complete ref, at least like this: <ref name=":13">http://www.yoursite.com</ref>. Or, better like this: <ref name="name your ref">{{cite web|url=|title=|author=|date=|publisher=|accessdate=}}</ref>. Does that make sense? You can name refs anything you want they don't have to be sequential numbers, in fact I rarely see that. Usually Editors use names that ring a bell for later use, and if you wrap the name in quote marks you can include spaces in the ref name. They will automagically number in the order they appear in the article if you use the {{Reflist}} template or use <references /> HTML markup. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, check out what Sony looked like in May of 2001 when it was launched. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:20, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels


@Checkingfax: I started replying to your generous edits and help at a Cafe called Coup d'Etat here in Paris on Saint-Honoré street; very pleasant indeed. Wifi is everywhere here ; it's pronounced "Wee-fee". Speaking of languages, there are lots of references in my article which I translated from French newspapers, some from Spanish and Italian. I would like to include an admonition on top of the page to inform users about their browser and recognizing foreign characters. A page can look pretty amateurish with code appearing instead of the correct characters and nice clean text.

  • "The Old Man" on Pawn Stars on American TV calls it Wee-Fee too.
    • 

  • There is a little template box that warns readers about special language characters. I've used them for Japanese and Chinese.
I see from the Planned Parenthood page that the refs are amazingly clear; not much difference to the end user, but from a programming point of view, my refs are a mess! I will attend to first of all giving each ref a good name (high priority), instead of the default number. And then organizing as on the Planned Parenthood page, which seems as it should be.

  • LRD is just another school of thought that not too many articles utilize. Has its pros and cons. I like inline citations, but I got used to LDR on the PP undercover videos page. No difference to the end user. Keeps all the ref clutter out of the body  of the article making prose easier to edit and refs harder to break.
    • 

  • Even with LDR you can still insert inline refs too.
I changed the (ref name=":13"), and got some unexpected results, but pleasing I think. Curiously I follow the same procedure that you mentioned, nearby text, then view-source, find, then the ref. I think with (ref name=":13") what happened is that something got deleted in all the activity; certainly a ref needs a citation and a closing /ref tag!

  • If you change the name of a ref you have to change the name everywhere it's been used in the article.
    • 

  • I broke that ref by inserting a trailing forward slash but the bot fixed it. I did not understand what you were trying to reference or that it was the only instance of named ref :13.
Proveit ! ...yet another incredible tool and another great tip! Thank you; it is working well. I was very eager to try the AutoWikiBrowser; it looked fantastic. But I have only 226 non-automated edits total (feels like a lot more!); one needs 250 non-automated mainspace edits, so, ...pretty soon I should have access to this amazing tool. I did notice that the references technology has lots of built-in intelligence; even when I move a whole paragraph, it renumbers references properly and cleanly.

  • The {{Reflist}} template is cool the way it pulls all the references out of the article and puts them in a sequentially numbered list in the order they appear in the article.
    • 

  • I don't have AWB yet. I might get hooked if I did.
    • 

  • I'm a "Tutnum" on Wikipedia now. Yee haw! (can't find the Tutnum on Wiktionary, but I've got the award to prove it!).
    • 

  • I did install about 10 javascripts in my common.js page and a few in my common.css page too. There is a page full of prepared javascripts with basic documentation that are pretty neat. Some of them I found are broken or break the other scripts so I had to remove them (easy). I put a new Wikipedia logo up that says 5,000,000 articles (the official logo will be set on about Sunday when Wikipedia hits 5M articles). The logo will only stay up for a few hours do to accessibility concerns. One .js script allows me to jump to the top of the page from the bottom of any page. Another allows me to archive any Talk page discussion with 'one click'. Another put a 'Pending changes' link at the top of my browser window so I can get to the Pending Changes list quickly, especially if I am on a computer where I don't have access to my browser bookmarks. I am a Pending-Changes reviewer and this is handy.
    • 

  • ProveIt is cool but haven't relied on it for a while, especially because I was on my mobile phone for a while and it did not function correctly.
Your explanations were perfectly clear, their understanding very easy in fact; ...made perfect sense, not muddy at all :)

  • Glad to hear that. Thanks.
The very early Sony page was interesting; gotta start somewhere...

  • If they put that page up today the Recent Pages Patrollers would tag it for Speedy-Deletion.


@Checkingfax:I believe it! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I got a notification that user User talk:GeoffreyT2000 changed something but the summary in the email was blank, so I can't follow up what was changed, if anything.

  • Go check his 'User Contributions' on the left hand set of links (not the link at the top of your browser -- that links to your contributions).


@Checkingfax: I still couldn't find anything, alas ... --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I read through [[WP:BETTER]] ...interesting, to be sure. Out of what appears to be thousands of help pages, to be guided to exactly what I need is indispensable. Thanks again for helping me save precious time.

  • You're welcome.
Thanks for unwikilinking the redlinks in the infobox.

  • I thought it was distracting in the infobox. We can add wikilinks when you create their pages. LOL.


@Checkingfax: ...and this too shall come to be : ) --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I did use the User:Citation bot/use; hm, I should use it more often ...very neat.

  • Citation Bot usually stalls for me. Then it goes in a loop and I have to go 'back' a page to get out of it, sometimes losing my whole edit. Ugh. Also, CB kicks in even when I don't ask for it. I hit save sometimes and off it runs. When it works, it does a good job but it's never done anything remarkable like take a proper doi and turn it in to a spankin' fully dressed reference.


@Checkingfax: I tried it many times; it worked, technically, but didn't find anything. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Best regards, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:07, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, Have you come across any Google Books you need to cite? Here is a helpful tool. Paste in the URL and bam, there's your citation all dressed up and ready to go. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Absolutely amazinging tool! Bookmarked! ...found so much stuff but it's often the refs that take the most time , and are fastidious; this brings editing into another realm. ...more thanks! --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Ref name= repeated three times to define ref
  Done

Natalie.Desautels, This diff shows the same ref name= being used three times to define a ref (note I removed the space before the closing quote mark in several instances (the BGW19bot inserted them for some reason —I'm going to ask Bgwhite why). However, Reflist does not show any error in the ref name being used three times. I'm befuddled. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: It may be due to my changing the ref name in order to more easily identify the content at a glance. The other ref attributes are the same though; article name, newspaper, date, writer, and so on. This seemed like a good idea in longer articles because certain parts of the article corresponded to certain sections in the Laucke page; I think it's easier for the readers who might want to browse the refs that relate just to a certain part of the article. Maybe this caused Reflist to seem correct; hypothetically... --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 02:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, once a ref is named, and it's repeated the repeats have to be self closing with a forward slash. If another ref has the same name that does not include a closing forward slash Reflinks should report a duplicate name error. Bgwhite's sleep deprived blurry eyes could not see any difference in the three named refs as I could not. When I ran reFILL it stripped out the two duplicate instances of the ref content and put a closing forward slash inside those named ref tags ... so the issue is fixed. You can view the diffs to see where reFILL removed the ref content. Bgwhite is reporting the issue to the AWB builder. The article is looking very solid.
Once you name a ref, then you just drop that ref name= anywhere you want in the article so you don't have to reinsert the whole ref attributes contents again. IMHO, some editors overdo it with the reuse and flood the article with multiple instances of the same ref by dropping the ref name= tag all over the place sometimes in the same paragraph.
Good job. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 03:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
More refs to fix
@Natalie.Desautels:

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/michel-georges-bregent-emc/ 

Processing error (HTTP Error: 504)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Michael_Laucke_~_Program_Given_At_Wigmore_Hall_London%2C_England.jpg 

Michael Laucke's evening Program Given At Wigmore Hall ---London, England, 1983 

Processing error (HTTP Error: 404)

http://www.michaellaucke.com/wp-content/grand-media/image/michael-laucke-governor-general-of-canada-command-performace-program-1981.jpg 

Governor General Of Command Performance, Program, November 29, 1981 

Processing error (Fetching error)

http://www.michaellaucke.com/wp-content/grand-media/image/michael-laucke-one-of-canadas-five-best-soloists---socan-magazine-.jpg 

Processing error (Fetching error)

(NOTE: I may have broken one of the URL's after I pasted it here by removing '---' from the URL. Also, performance is misspelled in URL ... performace vs. performance ... is the original URL spelled that way?) Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: ...working on these refs and others; lots fixed The copy/paste from sandbox was not exactly seamless :), but not too bad. ...am saving more often because a Save conflict occurred and I lost about 20 refs that I fixed. I dont think Wikipedia has a check-in, check-out system for simultaneous users, as we often see in collaborative, sumultaneous effort with PhP, asp.net and so on; but perhaps it's just at my basic Wikipedia level. At any rate, all refs will be perfect in the next two days at most. Proveit is a great tool! Yes, I have found mispelled URLs now and then; indeed, best to leave all ---'s in place : ) Thanks. best, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 07:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax:  a) ...will contact Anne Delong, Changedforbetter, & Betty Logan for editing help. Thanks. b) external link is going to stick for Michel-Georges Bregent; "made it a ref instead of an external link" ---and I thoguht I did it! best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 07:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Would you ping all three resource people (Anne Delong, Changedforbetter, & Betty Logan), or go one at a time; which is the best wikipedia protocol to follow? --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 11:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
@Natalie.Desautels:, I would reach out to them one at a time. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, Put this way at the top of the top level edit-source link above the infobox and any other code:

{{In use|30 minutes to fix the information in the History section|time=~~~~~}}

Replace 30 minutes with whatever time you need, up to two days ... but each time you check out, you can leave this template:

{{under construction}}

Replace the message with whatever you want to say;

Leave the time= alone, it will automatically populate;

Leave the *five* tildes without alteration or spacing ... five tildes records the time/date you set the template ... but does not set your username ... three tildes is a feature too ... but I forgot what it does ... maybe signature without time/date.

For Edit-Conflicts I back out one click at a time until I can copy my work to my clipboard, then cancel the edit, and go back in and paste and save it. But that does not work for large edits ... only for blocks of text where your paste won't walk on intermediate edits by other editors. Edit conflicts suck. Even a 10 minute edit can take an hour to weave in if you get the conflict notice 3 times. Early October I was trying to do a 12 minute edit on [[Umpqua Community College shooting]] and after 4 edit conflicts I put a 12 minute in use template up. The other editors deleted it. So I reverted it. Then they complained big time. Ugh. It's not a page lock, it's just a courtesy notice to allow courteous editors to back off for a bit. But, it can be used for up to two days straight according to the template, as long as you put up the under construction template when you're resting or sleeping. BTW, the UCC shooting article got 70,000 page views the first day it was up (Oct 1), and has gotten 230,000 page views in the 3+ weeks since. The Caitlyn Jenner page I have lightly edited has gotten 260,000 page views in the past 30 days. Michael Laucke is my 2nd most edited page in 5.5 years of editing. My first year I had one edit!

Betty Logan is the one that edits a lot of Snooker pages and posts on Snooker Talk pages. She knows how to edit pages too;

Anne Delong has only been onboard since 2013 but progressed quickly to be an Administrator. She is a Bluegrass musician and has crafted and improved a ton of music pages. Class act lady.

Changedforbetter is female ... has brought 19 articles to "Good Article" (GA) status.

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

insufficient inline citations
  Done

@Checkingfax: I am back in North America from beautiful Paris; boy, that seemed like a long trip. I got to work last night at renaming refs with a descriptive name instead of a number. I made good progress but still have a few more to complete. Would you be so kind as to help me better understand the tag that was placed on the Michael Laucke article? It refers to inline citations. I would like to get more information as to which citations have to be improved; then I can get to work on making the needy citations better. Thanks again! all my very best wishes, Natalie (jetlagged)--Natalie.Desautels (talk) 15:04, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, Wikiquette states that tagging should be explained every time‍—‌either in an edit summary, or if not enough room there then on the article Talk page. Otherwise it is WP:Drive by tagging. Welcome back!
With 80 references accumulated and named, I would re-use them to fill in the blanks, then remove that tag (you can do it yourself once you're satisfied that your refs cover the holes). In some cases it may just mean moving a ref from the middle of a paragraph to the end.
If you cannot find any existing or new ref to support your text, then edit or remove the text. Ouch.
PS: You can wikilink Michael Laucke without using an underscore and a pipe. This is OK: [[Michael Laucke]] ... no need for this: [[Michael Laucke]]. PPS: If you ever need to wikilink a person, film, etc. that has a parenthetical like this: Bertha Jones (artist). You can wikilink her with a "magic pipe" like this: [[Bertha Jones (artist)| ]] and that pipe will render it to the reader like this: Bertha Jones (relinked because there is no Bertha Jones page. The "magic pipe" will make the (artist) or (film) or (song) portion disappear. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Inline_citations
Natalie.Desautels, some links to help out with citations:

  • [[Wikipedia:Inline citation#When you must use inline citations|]]
    • 

  • [[Wikipedia:Inline citation#Citation density|]]
    • 

  • [[Wikipedia:Inline citation#Text–source integrity|]]
    • 

  • Inline citation
Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 10:01, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Constructive tagging
Read: WP:DRIVEBYTAGGING copied for your convenience below.



Aristotle once stated that "When people are friends, they have no need of justice, but when they are just, they need friendship in addition." It is often best to only point out the greatest flaw in an article, and along with this possibly mention something you like about the content. When it comes to confusing or ambiguous tags, such as {{npov}} or {{dead end}}, you should explain yourself on the talk page and/or in an edit summary. It can help to refer to applicable content policies, such as Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research, or Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, though WikiLawyering is discouraged.
Moving day for new lead
  Done

@Checkingfax:
Hi. The new lead is pretty ready to go. Would you like to have a go at copying and pasting into the article page from the User:Natalie.Desautels/sandbox.

Natalie.Desautels, OK I'm all clear now. Be sure to replace those four edits that Anne Delong made. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:59, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
@Checkingfax and Anne Delong:


Checkingfax I put back in Anne Delongs' edits which were overwritten in the edit conflict, as you said. Congratulations on the tip of the day ...looks great! kind regards, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 12:07, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Natalie.Desautels, That's respectful that you put Anne's edits back. As for TOTD, for today or was it yesterday, I added Wikidata and Wikispecies to the list of sister projects. While I was at it I scrolled through the whole month of November and edited about 20 other tips. It was easy because they are brief and there's no references to hang on them. Your references on Laucke are very solid with Checklinks ... no green or red links. Green and red are dubious or worse. Check out my edits to see what else I did in addition to moving the lead over and bundling up the references. I wrote a TOTD but they haven't gotten back to me about it. They, I mean we, recycle the same 366 tips every year, but they, I mean we, update them, or occasionally delete them if they're obsolete. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 12:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Natalie.Desautels and Checkingfax: A small but important thing for copyright attribution purposes: If you take away some text to your sandbox to reword, it's best to take only as much as you can do in a short time (to avoid edit conflicts), and return it yourself so that the changes are attributed to you.  However, if another editor helpfully copies it over for you, he/she should include in the edit summary a note of whose work it is, for example, "adding modifications from User:Plumbernickle's sandbox", or "adding a paragraph written by User:Plumbernickle on his/her user page" if it's new material.  Thanks for restoring my changes.—Anne Delong (talk) 12:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
refn template
  Done

Also, I tried and tried to get {{refn}} to work. It worked fine for awards and honors. [43] I am trying to make it work for any source that has 4 or more citations attached, such as

The method used in awards and honors. [43] does not seem to work for the others. Your kind help is appreciated (yet again : ). many thanks! kind regards, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:52, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Natalie.Desautels, I moved the new lead over from the sandbox and I combined some refs using refn. I also made 2 external links in the infobox in to ref links. I'll go combine some more now in the body with refn, so hold off on editing for a few minutes so I don't get an 'edit conflict'. Anne De Long did four edits. Can you paste them back in? I think I overwrote some of them. Cheers! I edited today's tip of the day for today. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:31, 5 November 2015 (UTC)









Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Laucke/Archive_2&oldid=1092056045"