User talk:Kleinzach/Archive 12
|This is a Wikipedia user page.|
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
Thanks, I'll look in a sec. So far as this move is concerned, I don't worry myself about the specific cats very much (I leave that to others!!) - my only comment is, that there are plenty of operatic tenors who are also great Lieder tenors or great ballad tenors or great oratorio tenors, and if 'tenor' simply gets swapped into 'operatic tenor' then new categories will be needed to be added to those who also made important careers in other genres. No good, for instance, if Heddle Nash ONLY appears in an 'operatic tenor' category (though he was one) because he was also 'the best Messiah in the business'. I'm sure you have thought this all out and I know the arguments have raged ever since I've been in WP at least! I hope someone will notify me of the final arrangements and I'll do my best to interpret them! Best wishes, Eebahgum (talk) 11:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Nicolas_Isouard Nicola v. Niccolò
Hello and thanks for the note. About the name change--there are two names in Italian:
- Nicola (one c, name pronounced with the accent on the second syllable) and
- Niccolò (pronounced with the accent on the last syllable.
The first one is modern Italian; the second is archaic and crops up in a few famous names such as Niccolò Paganini, Niccolò Macchiavelli, etc. To my knowledge, there is no name Nicolò, nor Nicolo (with one c and a final unaccented o). I have consulted a few sources, such as my Italian wife. (She is wrong about many things, but probably not on this!) If Grove actually has Nicolò (I can't check at the moment, then it is probably wrong). I left the title of the article as Nicolas because that is how his name appears sometimes. Wikipedia had a few spellings as Nicholas as well, which were not linking to the article. I went through and linked them. As long as the main name remains Nicolas, then the links will hold. I won't revert your change; after all, even the Maltese article has Nicolò, and he was born there. Maybe it's misspelled on his birth certificate (although I suspect that he was baptized Nicolas and the person who wrote the Maltese artcile just copied the wrong name from another source. It is, however, a common error among non-native writers of Italian to mix-up such names. Even Grove is certainly not immune to it, either. Use your judgment. It probably doesn't matter. Thanks again. I hope Spring has sprung where you live. It certainly has not done so here in Naples. Jeffmatt (talk) 14:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, again. Thank you for the note. There is a third possibility! The non-Italian spelling Nicolò may exist as a French misspelling of his name. He became well known in France and the French may simply have decided to spell it like that. (They are sneaky that way!) I suppose if we had an autograph or an original French opera poster with his name on it, we could figure it out. There is a statue of him in Paris as well as a street named for him, I think. Got any friends in Paris? I don't. Now, I am tempted to see if there is a Paris street guide on the internet! The plot thickens. Other names cause problems, as well. There are two legitimate spellings for Rossini's first name: Gioacchino and Gioachino. The first one is apparently the way he spelled it, but the other exists, as well.
Welcome document - fine. Is it worth mentioning (maybe in the bit about Grove et al) that references to published sources should be incorporated when possible, perhaps giving an example?
- Draft is here. Feel free to amend. Do we need a preamble about assessments in general (other projects ... useful for assessing project progress and choosing potentialGA/FA candidates, etc.)? The assessment page is accessible from the Archive that I pointed to. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 19:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've posted the agreed text to the Project talk page. As I say above, I won't be around much until Good Friday, so if you want to talk to SatyrTN before I reappear, feel free. Apart from the FAs, GAs and FLs, there's the question of destubbed articles which still have a Stub rating. I'll pick up the threads when I'm back. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 01:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- No word from SatyrTN in response to my message on his talk page (have you seen it?). It looks as if the bot is busy with Australian stuff at the moment, but do you think we ought to give him another nudge?
- On the matter of singer categories, am I to assume that moving singers into categories such as Operatic mezzo-sopranos is a preliminary to combining those categories with French (etc) opera singers to make categories such as French operatic mezzo-sopranos? If so, I'm in favour. If not, what is your longer-term objective? Incidentally, a lot of singers of opera also sing non-opera (Lieder, oratorios, crossover, etc.) and a lot of singers who specialise in non-opera do sometimes sing opera (Martyn Hill and Mark Padmore spring to mind). Does opera in those cases mean necessarily staged opera, or do they count as operatic if they've only appeared in recordings of opera and never on stage? It could get quite complicated. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well, another message from us to SatyrTN can't hurt - or can it? Some people aren't happy at being pestered and the code required may look daunting to him. He's also an admin and heavily involved in the LGBT Project, and who knows what in real life. The other option is to put in a request at Wikipedia:Bot requests - terra incognita (unless that's where you originally got in touch with him)! Worth a try? --GuillaumeTell (talk) 14:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Instant reply at Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Opera_Project_assessment_process - all the suggestions seem sensible on a cursory inspection. Any comments (to me) on this? --GuillaumeTell (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Outdenting. The things that occur to me are a) a direct approach to User:Happy-melon to ask what the prospects might be (he did say that he'd get round to it eventually, so he may have it on his to-do list) or b) an appeal on the Opera Project Talk page for anyone with a bot or who knows about bots or who has a friend with a bot or has programming skills (I looked at Wikipedia:Creating a bot and it seems rather daunting - I have done a bit of programming in my time so I know what's involved, but it was a long time ago.). AWB doesn't seem relevant, as it seems to be all about editing articles (or am I wrong?). Did you have a word with User:Black Falcon about this? If not, is that another option? GuillaumeTell 14:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I'll approach User:Happy-melon (tomorrow, as it's past my bedtime now, as usual). As for the snazzy sig, I thought that you were ahead of me on this?!? Anyway, I got the idea from the sig of the said melon, though I altered one of the colours to one that I could make out myself (I'm slightly colour-blind). Clever of me to choose a user-name that lends itself to this sort of thing, eh? Here's what my code looks like: <font color="forestgreen">[[User:GuillaumeTell|'''Guillaume''']]</font><font color="blue">[[User talk:GuillaumeTell|''Tell'']]</font> You stick it in the Signature box in your Preferences tab and tick the tick-box underneath. --GuillaumeTell 00:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- No response from the melon yet. As for the .sig, all you have to do is a) alter the fairly-easily intelligible code I used for my sig above to organise what you want for yours, b) click "my preferences" at the top of any WP page while you are logged on, c) paste all of the code into the box entitled "Signature", d) tick the Raw signature box immediately underneath, e) exit "my preferences" and do a quick edit on some page or other, followed by clicking the sig button above the editing box, f) click the "Show preview" button to see whether it looks OK, g) if it doesn't, go back and re-edit the code in c above, h) repeat steps e and f, and g if necessary, and so on until satisfied. When you are satisfied, just clicking the .sig button will produce the required result - no need to type in the string at any point. I'm about to click the button now, and here's the result: --GuillaumeTell 00:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- Could you have a look at the message from Hm at the bottom of my Talk page. I'm just back from London (The Minotaur and Simon Boccanegra) and will reply to him later this evening. Class=B is wrong and should say Class=Start, plus I need to remind him about the stubs/non-stubs situation but is there anything else we need to say? Best. --GuillaumeTell 21:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- You might have a look at the message I've just sent to HappyMelon about the generally sensible process that he's planning to follow. We did agree that we didn't want other Projects' assessments of "our" articles to be automatically replicated for our Project as part of this process (even if there's more than one assessment and they agree), didn't we? Hope the bears were friendly! --GuillaumeTell 16:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have made the changes based on your suggestion. About changing 'Things you can do' into 'Opera Project Introduction' , I am not really clear with that, however, please have a look at the amendments and let me know. And, if you have the time, could you do some grammer check at Plácido Domingo article. Thanks - Jay (talk) 02:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I think Voceditenore has come up with some pretty good suggestions. Certainly, we need articles on Pierre Jélyotte and Sophie Arnould, even though they came from a later era than Charpentier and Campra. There's some information in French about the major singers who worked for Lully (nearer the Charpentier/Campra period) here . --Folantin (talk) 11:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Opera singer cats
I'm not sure I want to take on that major task, at least not by myself. lol Let me think it over. Also, what do you think of my proposed list of May Singer of the Month? (see our wikiproject dicussion)Nrswanson (talk) 08:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Well I just say put them all down and let people write whatever they are interested in. I don't mind picking up the slack. I think it would do the project good to be thinking more about opera today than it has so far. Especially with the opera portal around. We probably should feature one contemporary singer a month on there to keep people interested.Nrswanson (talk) 09:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well as far as the opera portal is concerned I think we should feature one big name a month. And by big name I mean someone with lots of CDs when you walk into Barnes and Noble. Like Pavarotti, Sills, Battle, Terfel, Netrebko, Norman, Graham, Te Kanawa, Sutherland, Domingo, Fleming, Bartoli etc. These are people with draw appeal and may bring in readers to some of our other pages that wouldn't normally be read that often. The portal should have something sexy so to speak to bring people in. Then we could also feature one historic opera singer as well each month.Nrswanson (talk) 10:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Italian opera books
One IP user was merely adding these books - all in Italian, all from the same publisher - to lots of articles. They were not added as references to any edits he/she had made (although they were sometimes listed under a "references" header, sometimes not), indeed no other content was ever added. This struck me as being promotional spam. Since, in addition, none of these books is in English, I thought they didn't meet standards for inclusion. If I'm wrong about this, feel free to restore them. - Special-T (talk) 14:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation - sorry if I made more work for you! I still think the pattern of one editor adding just the names of many books (from the same publisher), with no info from those books inserted into the articles, is fishy, although perhaps not an actionable offense. - Special-T (talk) 13:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Some info if you could answer
Just curious, do you know why it is called “Elitist snob” and what is the different with “Opera purist”? I couldn’t get straight answer from my searching on the net. PS- I been thinking it must have been cool to have “Opera purist” article in here. - Jay (talk) 10:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- I know there are no straight answers for these and that troubles me (not that I enjoyed it). Here is some unofficial info I gathered. There are no verifiable references for those except here and there from some articles on the net or books.
- Elitist – In those days, operas were performed mainly for nobles, wealthy patrons’ a.k.a Elite group (Elitists). And these people funded opera houses and have their permanent seats.
- Snob - Some people today (mostly popular music listeners or those who don’t like opera) added “snob” after the Elitist, yea.. well for no apparent reason just to make fun of it; the fact is opera singers voices are a bit weird to the ears of those who don’t like it.
- Hence, “Elitist snob”
- Opera purists - to my understanding are opera fanatic fans who like the originality of opera to be maintained / preserved. Such concerts like “The three tenors” are big sins to them. Forget about Baz Luhrmann ‘s “broadway” stye La traviata, it is definitely a big NO to them (well I hate it too). Next, hmmm, popular culture adaptations (or .....“trivia”) are issues to them especially if the usage of opera in the adaptation looks like undermining the art of the opera (now it starts to sound like me because I don’t like trivia too). Purists also kinda treat Opera like some sort of sacred arts, therefore it is like a “sin” to reform the art into something new or change the art from how it supposed to be (you must be smiling reading this because you probably have seen me saying that I “am not”. Yes, I am NOT. Ok, pls just ignore it.)
OK boss ! Just kidding, I totally agree with linking singers by nationality and vocal range only, instead of sub-categories such as "female classical singers". I like to write articles about "lesser known" singers rather than the "big names" of which information is easily available. One question, if I expand an excisting article, can I remove the stub attached to it ? Thanks. Marleau (talk) 13:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually the guilty party is me ! I did a few adjustments with the place of birth and death, but realized after that I was not logged in ! Thank you for keeping an eye on my articles ! Marleau (talk) 01:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Disambiguation pages?Ades opera
Hi. Can you possibly explain why you are removing links to disambiguation pages - and also why you changed the title of the Ades Temprest opera? It's not clear to me why you are doing this. Thanks. --Kleinzach (talk) 14:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Unless there is more than one opera with the same title, the qualifier "(opera)" is more appropriate than the writer's name. As for the hatnotes, they are only meant to be used when someone may land on a page looking for a different one. If one goes to Tempest (Magic: The Gathering), it's clear they aren't looking for any other "Tempest", hence no need for a hatnote. The same holds true for Macbeth (opera) and the hatnote should be removed. Rhindle The Red (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- The Dryden version is a play and not an opera. Besides, Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Books - literary works states that article should probably be The Tempest (Dryden play), anyway.
- What do you mean by "normal WP practise"? Is this in terms of the hatnotes? Please see Wikipedia:Hatnotes#Disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. A hatnote on a non-ambiguous page such as Macbeth (opera) is extraneous. Rhindle The Red (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. It's part of a drive to give categories carrying navigational templates ("navboxes") a consistent type of name ("...navbox templates") rather than the "...navigational templates", "...navigation templates", "...navigational boxes", etc, that currently exist. "...navbox templates" includes the keyword "templates" and uses "navbox" in the same way "...infobox templates" uses "infobox".
If there aren't (m)any infobox or other template types within the category, it may even be worth renaming it to "Opera templates". I haven't looked that closely at it yet. Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree for the rest of Il Divo's but Sébastien Izambard is and still a pop singer who so happen to singer with the crossover singers. As I said, if he is not and will never be an opera singer, how can he "crossing over"? I watched Il Divo concert in Malaysia and Singapore when they came here (as the matter of fact, all the photos in Il Divo and their member pages were taken by me - the point is, his voice is so "sweety pop". You judge! - Jay (talk) 01:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
When you are doing a clean up tasks in multiple article, then why don't you complete the task, i.e. removing peacock terms and other clean up tasks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, and thanks for your message. Unfortunately I'm quite busy right now, and will be so until in a few weeks. So my presence here will be reduced. Basically, I understand your fears, but isn't Wikipedia:Listcruft only about articles that merely consist of just a list or lists? Nevertheless, there could be some improvement to this section. It could be turned into a written text... The reason why I added some singers was always their special relationship with the Staatoper. For example Elisabeth Schwarzkopf and Erich Kunz, who were part of the legendary post-war Mozart ensemble, or Giuseppe Di Stefano, Montserrat Caballé, Franco Bonisolli, the three tenors... they all were darlings of Vienna's opera buffs, and frequently or over a longer period of time performed at the Staatsoper. Anyway, I'd love to transform this section into written text, but this has to wait until I'll able to afford more time. Currently I'm just able to doing maintenance work... Best wishes, --Catgut (talk) 02:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your clear and convincing response on Black Falcon's talk page. I replied there, but for your convenience I'm copying what I wrote here:
- "OK, fair enough. I just wanted to make sure that the category shift was appropriate in light of how the category is interpreted. Thanks to both of you for taking the time and trouble to double check! As to setting up a structure for non-operatic voice categories, although I'm not sure I'm really all that well qualified, I won't say "no," but "maybe"--just not for a little while, as I contemplate a trip out of town shortly and in the meantime have my hands full trying to tame List of classical pianists and Classical pianists (recorded), which had fallen into a real mess. I've copied all the names between the lists that appeared in only one place when they should, at least arguably, have appeared in both, but the "general" list is sadly lacking in pre-20th-century names, and it's to that task that I've now turned my attention."
- To add a bit of elaboration, I'd be interested in taking you up on your promise of "more information" about setting up non-operatic categories, so please do keep in touch when time permits (no rush, for reasons outlined above); maybe a good place to start would be if you could point me to existing discussion about the issue so that I could bone up on it. As noted, I'm not sure I'm the best qualified candidate, but then, I wouldn't have thought myself the best qualified candidate to take on the pianist lists, either, when a merger proposal more or less pushed the matter into my lap. Drhoehl (talk) 21:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
While meta matters on Wikipedia leave me generally cold, it seems to me the Klebe template got singled out among the Category:Opera composer templates and I wonder why. Can you shed some light on this? All the best, Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
"No Free Image" lameness
Hi! I left you a lengthy response here: Thank you for your interest in this topic. It has become a pet peeve of mine. I'd like to find some other editors who feel similarly and organize a campaign to rid the Wikipedia of this silly scourge. --AStanhope (talk) 03:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou for that. I will apply it in future! Will the old articles have to be updated by hand as it were, or by bot? Should I go on a trawl? I'd like to create the Categories you suggest, but although you have directed me to the Classical Music wikiproject page I need a bit more guidance as I don't really understand how to interface with the project. Should I just choose some involved editors and invite them individually to discuss? Could you advise slightly more please?! - Thanks (and best wishes) Eebahgum (talk) 10:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
No free image graphic/opera singers etc
Certianly if you are able to produce a case that is consistant with wikipedia norms and the availible evidence. Argument by assertion however is a logical fallacy no matter how many times you commit it.Genisock2 (talk) 15:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Opera singer categories
The Record of Singing and Can you help
I am aware of those and often check them out for "inspiration" , although I have my own little agenda. One question, I just finished two new articles, Luigi Piazza and Tino Folgar, I barely hit the save button that already somebody added or changed something, nothing bad, but how can this be, it has happened before with other articles, just curious !?!? Marleau (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Luigi Piazza and Jean Planel
Since Piazza is part of an historical recording "Rigoletto" I thought it would be OK to add him, as for Jean Panel I just couldn't find any info on him except that he recorded a minor role in "L'heure espagnole", Jean Borthayre recorded much more and in my opinion is a far more important figure in French singers. But not to worry I won't make any changes to the list. Marleau (talk) 12:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Replace this image
It's protected because it's transcluded in some obscenely large number of pages - leaving it unprotected makes for a very easy vandalism target. (You upload a new image over the top, you see...) Shimgray | talk | 18:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hi -- the discussion you opened seems to be establishing pretty strong consensus for interrupting the addition of the image pending discussion. Do you have plans for drawing that !vote to a close? For initiating a WP:RFC or similar discussion? I think this was an excellent idea, and is getting close to needing another step to be taken. -Pete (talk) 21:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)