Welcome!Edit

Hello, Syek88, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! --Deskford (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Bassoon Concerto (Panufnik)Edit

  Thanks for contributing the new article Bassoon Concerto (Panufnik). However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable, by being clearly attributed to reliable sources, preferably using an inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you created, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the material (see here for how to do inline referencing). Thanks! P.S. If you need any help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. --Deskford (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello. I have added footnotes now. Syek88 (talk) 02:01, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks – good work! I've combined a couple of duplicate references and used the specific template for citing CD booklet notes. Hope this is OK. I'm surprised to see that this appears to be the only Panufnik work we have an article for here. --Deskford (talk) 18:47, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for this. I had been troubled trying to put the booklet notes into a footnote. Syek88 (talk) 21:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Syek88, you are invited to the Teahouse!Edit

 

Hi Syek88! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:12, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 1 DecemberEdit

  Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

A page you started (String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn)) has been reviewed!Edit

Thanks for creating String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn), Syek88!

Wikipedia editor Imaginatorium just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Excellent. I just added a link to the scores at IMSLP

To reply, leave a comment on Imaginatorium's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thank you for that. Syek88 (talk) 10:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

That would be another good DYK! Please do it yourself, I promised myself to stop at 100 reviews per year ;) - On the Main page, below the DYK section, is the link "nominate an article" (easy, filling a template), - for the first 5 nominations you don't have to supply the review of another nomination, - ask questions here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the pointer about DYK. I will try that out. However, I don't expect to finish the article any time soon. I am a bit slow, and only about a fifth of the way through. Syek88 (talk) 10:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

You don't have to be finished for nominating, please don't miss the deadline of 7 days after starting the article, no matter how far you got. You can always ask to wait for more, but will have to ask for mercy ("ignore rules") if later. Normally, the process between nomination (wait for a reviewer, discuss, wait for someone to pick it) and appearing is long anyway, - I had one yesterday appearing four days after writing, - an exception! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you - I had not noticed the seven-day deadline. I will nominate it on Saturday if I can, and then continue to work on completing it. Syek88 (talk) 07:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Just another note of thanks: I managed to find a sentence I could slightly rewrite, hope you approve. (You surely can't really say "the number 3", unless it's a bus.) I wonder slightly why you have "crotchets" and "measures", where I would have written "bars". Imaginatorium (talk) 08:27, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I use "measures" and "crotchets" instead of "bars" and "quarter notes". This is just a personal and inconsistent quirk: as I understand it, "measure" is American and "crotchet" is British. I am happy to change it to whatever is the norm on Wikipedia. I have been using my own, mainly British, spelling until now ("ise" instead of "ize", for instance). Syek88 (talk) 08:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I am with you for "measure" vs. "bar" which is quite ambiguous ;) - You might consider "quarter notes", for consistency and because the English terms for the faster notes may be less familiar to our general users, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
WP style theoretically says you should use consistently AmE or BrE, but I think it's nice not to be too fussed about things like this. I don't see how "bar" is ever ambiguous: what else does it mean but bar? Imaginatorium (talk) 09:10, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
ps: DYK is slow, Mit Fried und Freud (Buxtehude) is scheduled to appear today, nominated 12 November, - now we get the funeral music close to Christmas ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps I should change crotchets to quarter notes. I can imagine that the the latter might be more well known to British readers than the former is to Americans. "Quarter note" at least is a descriptive term. I have submitted the article for DYK (before the seven-day deadline) with a little snippet about a plastic shopping bag. Thank you very much for the advice and guidance. And Buxtehude: now that is a contribution to our cultural history. I wonder how many pages Wikipedia has on Buxtehude compositions versus how many it has on Katy Perry songs. Syek88 (talk) 09:22, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Very few on Buxtehude compositions, mainly Membra Jesu Nostri which is more or less a display of text ad translation. It's on my mind for improvement. Did you know that we don't even have an article about Bach's Chromatic Phantasy and Fugue? On my mind first: BWV 243a, my unwanted Christmas present ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:50, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 24Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cadence. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Piano Sonata Hob. XVI/20Edit

Harrias talk 12:01, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! What do you think of an infobox, as here? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. I have added the info box although it is a bit short on data. For example, I didn't put any data next to 'form' because 'sonata form' of course wouldn't be accurate for the work as a whole. And thank you again for your help with the DYK. Syek88 (talk) 09:16, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, the shorter the better, but a first-glance help about time and location, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
ps: more parameters are documented in {{infobox musical composition}} --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Nice to see op. 50 in prep! How about an infobox for that one? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the enhancements to the Opus 50 article. I have added an infobox, minus several fields (key, form, etc.) that would only suit stand-alone compositions. Syek88 (talk) 07:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Excellent! The other catalogue numbers should probably also go to the article, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn)Edit

Harrias talk 12:01, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

PreciousEdit

Haydn
Thank you for quality articles on articles on the music of the classical period, such as Joseph Haydn's Opus 50, written with expertise and love, for logical organisation and exquisite edit summaries, good questions and informative boxes, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:46, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

That is a very kind note, thank you. I greatly appreciate your assistance, guidance and kindness in many instances. I am enjoying contributing here. Syek88 (talk) 10:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

You made my day! That's what I told PumpkinSky when he left me the message it was "my day" in 2010. (Still on my user page, his user name was Rlevse then. Three years ago today, I told him that he is precious, after he just left. I miss him.) You made my day because you mentioned "enjoy"! You have possibly no idea how rare that is, - I hope it will stay enjoyable. I loved yesterday's DYK, not only because of the great article that probably deserves the label "Good article" (GA, my initials ;) ), but also because the image was removed from an article I wrote ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
A year ago, you were recipient no. 1108 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Two years now! - Your Mozart concerto is on my list for a review, but there are a few things I need to do first, - I have been busy, enjoyably so, with these compositions, and today is the composer's day of death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Gerda. I can't say I know much of Poulenc. Your interests seem to be both earlier (Bach, Buxtehude) and later (Poulenc) than mine! Syek88 (talk) 19:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Three years now! Poulenc wasn't exactly my interest, nor is Bernstein, but when readers are looking because of celebrations, I try to do my share. In 2015, it was Sibelius, in 2016 Reger. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Haydn Quartets GANEdit

Hi Syek88. I've just finished conducting the Haydn Quartets GAN review, and it is currently on hold. Could you please take a look at my concerns on the review page? I really enjoyed the article.-RHM22 (talk) 00:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn)Edit

The article String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn) you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:String Quartets, Op. 50 (Haydn) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of RHM22 -- RHM22 (talk) 02:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations on your fine article! By the way, I'm an administrator here. If you have any questions or requests, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page.-RHM22 (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cadence. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

It is nice to make friend with you!Edit

  It is nice to make friend with you!
Thank you for editing the two wikipages and adding more accurate information!

I am a Chinese student attending an int'l school in China and my dream is to major in music. But I had far to little knowledge about further knowledge about music. Furthermore, since I live in China, I cannot gain access to many foreign webpages because they are censorship in China. Therefore I really need your help. From your user page I know that you are knowledgeable in classical music after all! That's it and thanks for your reading.

Christopher Christopher2625649908 (talk) 14:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Christopher. It was a pleasure to see the article that you wrote on BWV 1070, a work with which I was not familiar. I am sorry to hear about the trouble you have with censorship. I am lucky in that I can access many books and journal articles through my university library. Please inform me if you create a new article. It would be a pleasure for me to make additions to it from reference material to which I have access. Syek88 (talk) 06:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Syek88:Sorry I did not see your reply until now because I was not a given a reminder once you've finished the reply. And thank you for your helping me out of the difficulties.
My pleasure. Please point me to your divertimento articles if you decide to start them. Syek88 (talk) 00:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart)Edit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 06:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart)Edit

The article Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 08:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart)Edit

The article Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 13:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Adding human congratulations to those of the bot, above. Excellent job, and most enjoyable to review. Tim riley talk 13:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Maurice RavelEdit

Mozartian here and there, among the many other influences. I have him up for peer review if you have time and inclination to look in. All comments gratefully received. – Tim riley talk 13:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Tim. It would be my pleasure to read and comment on the article. Ravel is not quite within my wheelhouse - with him I am no more than a casual listener and occasional pianist - but I will see if I have any useful comments to make. Tomorrow morning is looking promising for me. You are most fortunate to have seen Brendel live. Alas, I am too young and missed out before his retirement. Syek88 (talk) 23:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments chez Ravel. I'll enjoy working through them. Here, to exasperate you, are the names of some other pianists I heard play in the concert hall: Arthur Rubinstein, Clifford Curzon, Annie Fischer, Emil Gilels and – my trump card – Wilhelm Kempff. When you are as old as I am you will be able to bore young people in just the same way about the greats you heard back in the 2010s: it's one of the pleasures of old age. – Tim riley talk 11:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Kempff! You must tell me what he was playing! I wonder how you guessed he would excite me more than the other luminaries in your list. He is very much on my mind at the moment: only 36 hours ago I finished a one-week journey through his 1960s Beethoven sonata cycle. I'm not sure about your prediction. I think there is a lot of depth in professional piano ranks today, but few who will be remembered. The K. 491 is an example: off the top of my head I cannot recall any stand-out pianoforte recordings of the work from this century (and, disappointingly, I have never heard it live). Syek88 (talk) 12:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
The last time I heard him play at the Festival Hall it was an all-Beethoven affair: the Opp 109, 7 and 111 sonatas, in that order. I never heard him in a concerto: he seems to have given up concerto playing (in London at any rate) when I was still a lad. How did I guess he'd appeal to you? A man who puts up a thoughtful article on K491 seems unlikely to be more impressed by my having heard Rubinstein than Kempff, who, after all, was an idol of Brendel himself. An idol's idol seems to have a head start. (Not always, though. Fauré, who may possibly be my favourite composer of all, worshipped Chopin, who leaves me cold, and I love Britten and Shostakovitch but not their great influence, Mahler.) Now, away with you and bring K453 or K488 up to GA! Tim riley talk 16:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Steinway & SonsEdit

Please see WP:3RR. You have already passed 3 reverts today. If you revert again, you may be reported to the administrator's noticeboard and blocked. Instead, I suggest that you discuss here. Thanks. Epic Genius (talk) 01:34, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

thank you, I did not know that. But please please please stop abetting a paid shill. Please. Syek88 (talk) 01:36, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

RavelEdit

After a thorough and stimulating peer review I have put Maurice Ravel up for FAC. If you care to look in you will, as I hardly need say, be most welcome. – Tim riley talk 16:41, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Beethoven concert of 22 December 1808Edit

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!Edit

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

February 2016Edit

  Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on List of Bernie Sanders presidential campaign endorsements, 2016. Thank you. Chrisw80 (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2016 (UTC) Chris, my friend, I think you're confusing good faith with intelligence. Syek88 (talk) 21:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Syek88, thank you for responding. I intentionally was not evaluating either person's intelligence or the strength of their arguments, simply the behaviour. Your edit summaries seemed a bit rude (as was the IP users), and the continued reversions weren't conducive to civil discussion. I warned the IP user in the same fashion and in addition, they received a stronger warning from an admin. My suggestion is if an edit is contentious and isn't blatant vandalism, it's probably best to take it to the talk page, or seek assistance before you end up 4 reverts in. I'm just offering friendly advice, you're free to ignore it if you wish. :) Chrisw80 (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Syek88. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Julius Harrison/GA1Edit

I have addressed the points you made. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:07, 17 December 2016 (UTC) I think not only have Softlavender and I addressed all the issues, but we have added new content with sources and made other minor prose improvements. Today is Sunday here and I have some time for anything else, but next week is a bit full of RL. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:09, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

An olive branchEdit

Hi, first of all, I'd like to compliment you on your fantastic work at Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart). It's a really well-detailed article, and I hope it gets to FA status. I didn't mean for my oppose !vote to be taken personally; I wanted to make sure a reviewer would look at any discussion before deciding on FA so that there would be some action, because I do believe that a discography would meet comprehensiveness. I won't rehash anything from the comments page here, this is just a little message to say hi, give congratulations for a job well done, and build some rapport between us so that we can get this to FA status with no hard feelings. Warmly, Icebob99 (talk) 02:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

TFAREdit

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart), - I requested the new FA - congratulations! - to be shown on 24 March, the day of the completion. Please check the "blurb", - compared to the lead, I linked several more terms because of a broad readership who may not know what musicians mean by movement. I wonder if Figaro should be mentioned in lead and blurb, as something people may have heard of. Perhaps copy the link to the history of the Burgtheater, to not leave them under the impression it was premiered in today's building. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Wow, thank you very much! I think I will be too nervous to look at the front page the day it is on. Syek88 (talk) 18:22, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
First you might support the nomination ;) - Looking away is a good approach, because sometimes vandalism happens, but enough people usually watch out, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I am translating the article to Spanish, as it is short and enjoyable. I also love classical music. BTW I supported this above Triplecaña (talk) 16:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
That is wonderful to hear, Triplecaña. Thank you. Syek88 (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I am in the process of copying the example infobox to his other piano concertos, and find them in very different shape, - perhaps we should improve at least those mentioned in the article? - How about a link to Mozart piano concertos? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps it would work as a bolded and centred link at the foot of the infobox? Syek88 (talk) 08:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
I meant a link in the article. We shouldn't load the infobox, but might consider to pipe link it for "by W. A. Mozart" there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
As a trial I just added a sentence to the first paragraph of Piano Concerto No. 25 (Mozart), which gets us a link to Mozart piano concertos. What do you think? Syek88 (talk) 10:17, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
I sent you a thank-you-click before I even saw the question. Yes, good approach! All concertos should have a certain format, and minimum information, I think, - perhaps we can collect here?
Should have:
  • link to key in the first line, not bold
  • summary in the lead
  • {{authority control}}
  • link unfamiliar terms
  • check spelling of keys
  • Use European date format
Avoid:
  • headers such as "The music"
  • sandwiching text between images right and left
  • bare urls
  • overlinking (Germany, Paris, linking second time)
For a start, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:28, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
added a bit above, - all infoboxes now done. No. 6 is practically no article yet. Where would we find sources? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
I have added a paragraph to the article based on some liner notes; I find liner notes an easy first port of call to expand content quickly. There will be academic sources—four or five books in particular—but I own only one of them and it seems to have gone missing. Syek88 (talk) 17:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
This all seems good to me, although I don't know what "authority control" is. Syek88 (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
It's about publication, taken from Wikidata. Never hurts to have it, because even when nothing is available at the point of writing, it will come automatically if added. Look at this author or this piece, at the bottom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) for TFAEdit

Hi Syek. This is just a friendly note to let you know that the Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart) article, which you nominated at FAC, has been scheduled as today's featured article for March 24, 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 24, 2017. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:34, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

... and another friendly note that it looks lovely today! Thank you for outstanding work on an outstanding piece! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Gerda, for your kind words, help and encouragement, not only with this article but more generally over a period of some years now. It is scary to see it on the front page... Syek88 (talk) 10:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Fear not ;) - It was easier for me, because my first TFA was a collaboration, Messiah (Handel), to which Brianboulton and Tim riley kindly invited me, - taking care of most problems. I received notice that a dear relative died, - C minor is appropriate, and I started An die Hoffnung in her memory. Perhaps I should disambiguate, because Beethoven wrote one as well. To Hope! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I am very sorry to hear this, Gerda. Your article on An die Hoffnung is such a way to remember. I will listen to it this evening. Syek88 (talk) 18:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
ps: album leaf --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Good to see it on the front page – congratulations! I've just read the article through for the first time today. A very interesting read – thanks for all your work on this article. --Deskford (talk) 16:48, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Deskford! Syek88 (talk) 18:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!Edit

Just dropping by to thank you for the FA review at Morihei Ueshiba, and also for your changes to the article itself, all were much-needed improvements. Much obliged! Yunshui  11:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

It has been my great pleasure to read the article, thank you. I had more time today than I thought I would so I've finished off my comments. Syek88 (talk) 17:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you once again for the review. I think I've now dealt with all of the issues you raised (plus your comments encouraged me to mine the Green/Svinth source a bit more thoroughly, which allowed me to add a couple of bits and pieces and improve the sourcing). Very much obliged. Yunshui  14:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
My pleasure. I will probably not get the chance to check back into the review until the weekend. I hope the image issue (which is way over my head and won't affect my review) is resolved somehow. Syek88 (talk) 17:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Regarding your FAC at Oxford College of Emory UniversityEdit

Thank you for leaving your in-depth review for my FAC! I'm not sure if you only read the sections your reviewed, or you looked at the whole article. My point is, I believe the sections that you reviewed were and are the weakest, and I will try to work on improving those sections, including finding a diversity of sources to use. However, I have reviewed the rest of the article again, and I do believe that the majority of the article meets the FA standard. Of course, if you disagree with me on this point, then there isn't much I can do to improve the article during the candidacy process. However, I am wondering if you could take some time to quickly review parts of the rest of the article and let me know if you still believe this article as a whole cannot be brought to FA during the candidacy process. Thank you again for taking your time to review! Best, --haha169 (talk) 04:22, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

I think you are probably right. I had an overview read of the whole article this evening and agree that it is the present-tense sections of the article that encounter the difficulty of not having many independent sources (much of the history is sourced to Emory publications although they seem to be more independent and scholarly). I think I need to ponder over it for a day or so. Syek88 (talk) 17:51, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that this was closed, although I do think that is where it was headed. My developing thought over the last couple of days was to pick up on what Juliancolton mentioned about the absence of independent sources in the present-tense section of the article. I think the article might have been stuck between Featured Article Criteria 1.b. and 1.c. - it needed to be comprehensive, discussing both history and present day, but there weren't "reliable sources" to support that breadth. I'm not sure that conflict is reconcilable, although perhaps an article dedicated only to the college's history would stand a better chance. Having said that, I might be overly pessimistic. Syek88 (talk) 22:02, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your suggestions! I will try to do more research in the coming weeks to see if I can find more independent sources and improve on the present-day parts of the article. I'll see what I can do to satisfy you and juliancolton's concerns. --haha169 (talk) 06:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Piano Concerto No. 6 (Mozart) has been nominated for Did You KnowEdit

 Hello, Syek88. Piano Concerto No. 6 (Mozart), an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know . You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

FAC reviewEdit

Do you have any interest in reviewing Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Pūnohu White/archive2? Thanks either way.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:18, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I certainly do have an interest because it is a most interesting article. You'll have seen from my edits that I've been circling around making some review comments for the last few days. I'm probably in the same boat as Dank in that I really don't know what to say at the moment. I think it will be another few days or even a week before I work it out. You look to be in good shape: two supports and one close-to-a-support and it's still early. Syek88 (talk) 19:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Piano Concerto No. 6 (Mozart)Edit

 On 28 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Piano Concerto No. 6 (Mozart), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in Mozart's early Piano Concerto in B-flat major, two oboes play in the outer movements, and two flutes instead in the Andante? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Piano Concerto No. 6 (Mozart). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Piano Concerto No. 6 (Mozart)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Andha NaalEdit

I don't understand why Vensatry removed the claim that this film's script was rejected by AIR when it was first written as a play. Though this claim was made by the director's wife, there is no harm in attributing it to her, right? In fact, there are other claims in the article attributed to her from the same source. --Kailash29792 (talk) 08:22, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure - you would have to ask Vensatry. Perhaps its removal was inadvertent? I agree that it is acceptable to have it in the article with it attributed to her. Syek88 (talk) 09:39, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Louis Leblanc FACEdit

Hello, as you previously commented on the article when I had it up at FAC, and was unable to resolve your concerns, I want to say that I just re-nominated it and feel I have addressed everything. If you have any more comments or suggestions, I'd definitely appreciate it. Kaiser matias (talk) 03:40, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know, Kaiser matias. If I do review the article I promise I will make my comments earlier in the process than I did last time. Syek88 (talk) 00:46, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mary Kom (film)/archive1Edit

On your demand, I asked a more accomplished writer to tweak the mistakes in the article. You need to review it and talkback at the FAC. Thank you!Krish | Talk 08:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Please talkback at the FAC.Krish | Talk 08:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

FAC reviewing barnstarEdit

  The Reviewer Barnstar
FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the ten FAC reviews you did during April. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Mike. Syek88 (talk) 23:28, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Syek88. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)