Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:00, 18 August 2005

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. I will respond on yours unless you ask me not to; please respond on mine so that I get notified via a new message box as I tend not to watch other people's user pages.

Please remember the five pillars and, in particular, please be civil.

Initial welcome

Greetings, and welcome to wikipedia! Noticed you augmenting and diminishing some of the music articles, and groaned happily at the pun on your userpage. (As a side note, I'm a music major, and about one class off from a CS minor, myself.)

Seems you already know what you're doing, but just about anything else you could hope to read about editing Misplaced Pages is linked at the Misplaced Pages:Community portal. (The Misplaced Pages:Simplified Ruleset is a good overview, though.) Always delighted to see someone else editing in the classical music sections. I hang around a bit around Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Composers, myself; Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Music might also give you some ideas and jumping-off points. Happy editing, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 17:43, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Another welcome

Hi, fellow newbie! I am the culprit who, trying to rehabilitate half-forgotten piano concertos from the Romantic era, has been adding entries to the repertoire list without having found the time to research and comment on their historical relevance in the main text of the article. The list now has a new home of its own thanks to you.

By all means keep writing quality pieces for Misplaced Pages in your personal key. There is no such thing as an overdose of encyclopedia editing. --Defrosted 12:41, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

And thank you for your support on my admin nomination! I shall attempt to put the shiny new buttons to good use; also, if you're ever still feeling clueless newbie-ish, my talk page is open. I love what you've written on your user page now: strange that it's so easy to just walk into a project like this one, no? Mindspillage (spill yours?) 13:16, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Robert -- just wanted to extend a greeting from another music editor. I love the Abel Muzorewa quotation on your user page; he's evidently a very wise man. I hope you stick around here! We need good music editors, and there really aren't many of us (and besides, Lyadov needs an article!) Best wishes, Antandrus 04:08, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Eavesdropping

Greetings again! Noticed your question on Antandrus' talk page and figured I'd butt in. meta:Music markup might answer a few of your questions about the possibility of using something like Lilypond in Mediawiki the way math already has TeX for notation entry. Basically, everyone agrees that it would be a good idea, it's just a matter of developer time to put into it. I asked one of the devs about it a few months back, who said that yes, it is on the to-do list, but it's not a high enough priority for there to be a definite time attached to it... in other words, Real Soon Now. For the meantime, as you suspected, save a picture from your notation software of choice. I believe I've seen people using Sibelius, Finale, and Rosegarden for such; don't know anything useful about any others. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 13:05, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rebecca Clarke

Actually, I think the FAC page is a pretty good place to do it, since it gives other people a chance to come in and comment on your comments! The whole discussion will eventually be linked from the talk page, anyhow. I'm just checking my messages before I go do other things for the afternoon (signs of wikiholism?), will address Taxman's and your comments there later when I have more time to address them properly. Thank you for them; I do like it when people look at the picky things, and you can be bold and fix some yourself even if it's on FAC—IMHO that's largely what the process is there for! (Truthfully, this is my first go-round with FAs and I didn't expect much support at all; I'm surprised.) I'm glad you like it even in its imperfect state. :-) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Lutosławski

Hi Robert -- I'm happy to hear you are taking on Lutosławski (and Messaien!). Don't worry, you're not duplicating any effort of mine at the moment: I've started writing articles on major standard rep pieces that are missing, and then I'll probably go back to medieval and Renaissance composers for a while. Regarding images, I can't help you there: I'm yet to find any source for usable images of 20th century composers (barring "fair use" of copyright images, which is controversial, and which I never do). Best, Antandrus 15:19, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Rebecca Clarke

Hi, I noticed your recent edit to Rebecca Clarke. While it is fine that you don't believe that sentence belongs in the article, it is not fine that you have chosen to crap-up the sentence to cause it to be removed. It is not acceptable to disrupt wikipedia to make a point. If you disagree with the presence of material in an article, please remove it. If something prevents you from removing it, then please do not convert the material to junk just to create cause for someone else to remove it. (please leave any reply here, I'll find it, Thanks!) --Gmaxwell 18:41, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry my edit displeased you. I had already corresponded with Mindspillage on this and she exhorted me to be bold. If I had disagreed with the presence of the sentence I would have removed it. Since I thought the sentence was trying to make a valid point I edited it to say what I thought it should say.

I note that Mindspillage has edited the passage again, and it now reads with much more relevance than the original version, and says roughly what my edit said (which I suspect is what Mindspillage was driving at too). I do not accept that I "disrupted Misplaced Pages". On the contrary, I feel that what has been arrived at is much better, and would not have been achieved without my edit.

I found the coarse tone of your comment completely inappropriate. I am not quite so devoid of ego that I enjoy being told I've "crapped-up" something, and written "junk". I take it that crap-up is a term in common use in USA and wasn't meant to be offensive? And your facts are wrong - I have not caused the sentence to be removed. Please assume good faith. --RobertG ♬ talk 06:45, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Well I looked through the history and saw that you had previously removed it, which is where my assumption of good faith ended. I am sorry for coming off so coarsely, but the specific phrasing you used 'work of foo pretensions' would far more likely be found in mockery than in earnest use, at least in the part of the world that I inhabit. It's interesting to note that I don't consider the current text to in any way resemble your edit, a further indicator that I've misunderstood you. I came across your edit only after reading the article, noticing that text, then going to chastise Mindspillage for her ridiculous prose... before I noticed that this text had just been added, and wasn't her fault. :) As far as removing the sentence, I posted that message long before Mindspillage's update, and actually would have removed the sentence myself if I hadn't spoken to her and found out that she was in the process of making a long edit. I wasn't claiming that removal had happened, but rather that it would happen and that it was your intention. I hope you can forgive me for jumping to that conclusion. I think the current text in the article is good, and I am sorry for assuming that you were trying to achieve anything except an improvement. --Gmaxwell 17:31, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Maybe aspirations would have been better than pretensions.

I more than forgive you: I thank you that you made me think long and hard about what I was doing here in Misplaced Pages. See my user page. No hard feelings. But I hope you don't ever do the same to anyone else. --RobertG ♬ talk 08:59, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Leaving

Hi Robert,

Thank you for the kind compliment, and I am very sorry to see that you may be leaving. I do understand, though: in the last ten years I've been a member of maybe a dozen internet communities, and except for Misplaced Pages, at present, I have left them all. If you do decide either to stay, or to return, I for one shall welcome you warmly. We need people with your knowledge and your standards. Best wishes, Antandrus (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I share your hope that Misplaced Pages might rise above the level of mediocrity you fear, and I'd like to thank you for your contributions towards this goal, and in particular your help with hammering out some sort of system for the composition listing. It is this sort of co-operation, I feel, that will help Misplaced Pages continue to improve. Thank you for your time, regards, Mallocks 21:48, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back

Occasional or not, glad to see you return. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:30, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I did indeed, but it looked like you wanted to keep your secret identity under wraps (although I'm not the only one who caught on!). Mindspillage (spill yours?) 17:10, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Of Jokes and Pillars

Thank you for the joke; here's my usual award for viola humor. I also see you added a five pillars notice to the top of your talk page. I discovered these guidelines for Misplaced Pages use a short while back, and was shocked that no one had told me about these earlier. If everyone just kept these pillars in the forefront of their mind, we'd have a much better encyclopedia, and much less confrontation in the community. Regards, Bratsche 03:49, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Thanks for posting the compliments last week in appreciation of the efforts I made to wikify your piece on Lutoslawski. I was persuaded to take on the task of wikifying such a long entry because of the comprehensiveness and excellence of the research that you undertook in writing the article.

Honored to have you (and your British spellchecker) working on Misplaced Pages again.--Defrosted 12:36, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Johnny Wilkinson

Re: the pseudonyms - looking at the contrib's edits, he's an Australian with an inferiority complex. I think they can safely be ignored. Average Earthman 11:32, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

Thank you for supporting my candidacy for administrator. Kelly Martin 14:42, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Beethoven symphonies

Hello! I noticed the changes you made in the Beethoven sonatas' articles. Would you mind looking at Category talk:Beethoven symphonies? --Missmarple 19:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Many thanks for supporting my candidacy to become an administrator, and for the good words! Schissel : bowl listen 17:29, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Grawemeyer Award (Music Composition), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Hello there. All I can say about the Vegemite Vandal is that WE'RE ONTO HIM! He won't get away with it for long, no siree. Little worker bees from all over come and patch up what's broken. Quite splendid, really. Brequinda 09:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lichtenstein

re Lichtenstein:

Glad you enjoyed, it was fun to do, I thought I knew a bit to start with and now I know even more =:-). Lots more changes this evening so hopefully it still looks ok.

--John-Nash 20:59, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jig

I changed the link on Ronald Stevenson because (as I read on Gigue) Jig is a folk dance and Gigue is a dance, commonly used in suites. Maybe Ronald Stevenson only decided to spell Gigue in another way, but was still thinking about Gigue? --Missmarple 28 June 2005 14:51 (UTC)

Your editing speed is unstoppable

Beat me to it, RobertG re: "most difficult"... I like your wording better even. :) --bleh fu talk fu June 28, 2005 14:41 (UTC)

Perhaps you'll want to tackle this. My brain hurts, and nothing comes to mind. --bleh fu talk fu June 28, 2005 14:54 (UTC)

Looks peachy, well done. --bleh fu talk fu June 28, 2005 16:00 (UTC)

As for editing Lutoslawski, I guess I was decrying my own laziness and lack of willingness to wade into a morass of prose, which would probably consume and hour and a half of my time. --bleh fu talk fu June 29, 2005 18:57 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the very kind welcome - I'm glad you were happy with my edits on Lutoslawski (I was a bit nervous, it being my first edit of a 'real' article). Overall I thought it was a really good article though; I was astonished to see an recent composer tackled so extensively and so well. There are one or two other factual additions/quotes I might put in once I can verify them, but I need to decide if they're really valid contributions first (for example, a quote from him about the course on musical forms with Maliszewski being 'the most important in my conservatory studies', and its specifically dealing with psychological aspects of musical form). Thanks also for the 'five pillars' link - I've whacked one on my talk page too - such a good idea!

Oh yeah, also - isn't De Stijl ace? I don't know if the recording I heard was the same as yours, but I'd say it (and 'Hadewijch') are perhaps my favourite works by Andriessen. Hutchies 28 June 2005 16:58 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for your support on the occasion of my RfA. I promise to continue to uphold the Five pillars of Misplaced Pages. Thanks, Bratsche June 29, 2005 16:19 (UTC)

Lutoslawski and other images

Hi Robert. In response to your question - I wrote to the webmaster at PMC (http://www.usc.edu/dept/polish_music/), and recieved an answer from the manager, who answered that the images they use are in the public domain. I have this email archived. I have added other images from their website, for instance to Grazyna Bacewicz and plan to add more - but these are only Polish aritsts, of course. I have no idea for Messiaen, but I will look and let you know if I find something. Karol June 30, 2005 08:48 (UTC)

As to Messiaen, we could potentially use any image found in google hits, after makign sure its not against copyright. Karol June 30, 2005 08:57 (UTC)

Panufnik - if you like it, then go ahead and add the image at PMC. PD gives the right to anyone to use these images. I havn't got around to editing Panufnik's article, but someday I would, so if yo udon't add an image I probably will at some point. Karol June 30, 2005 09:10 (UTC)

La mer

I'm glad someone is appreciating that. It actually took quite a bit of untangling, because there were references with capital and small "m" to both the Trenet and Debussy works, and I had to disambiguate both while redirecting so both forms worked. And after the last couple of comments I'd gotten on similar work I've been doing (mostly negative) it was starting to look like a thankless job. -- BRG July 1, 2005 18:36 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Witold Lutosławski

I appreciate your attempts to reach the compromise - I am sure we can reach it. Replied. As for images, look here - I am sure many of them fall under Polish PD template. Don't be afraid of fair use, it is, after all, fair. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 4 July 2005 15:49 (UTC)

Messiaen

Wow, nice job on this rewrite! This must have been brewing for a while. :-) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:23, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Re "Bach greatness"

Hi Robert. I've replied to your comment on my talk page. Paul August ☎ 17:24, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for voting in my RfA; I promise I'll wield my sacred mop with care. If you ever need me for anything, you know where to find me. Thanks again! -- Essjay · Talk 15:20, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Lutosławski

Hi Robert! Thanks for the note; I'll have a look and tell you what I think. Wow, I haven't been watching FAC at all recently; I had no idea there was a composer article being considered (I've been wasting far too much time on sterile RC patrol ... ack.) I'm not entirely sure how to handle images; it's always dicey when you have to get them from other sources. Why don't you write to USC yourself, if they claim their images are PD? Anyway I'll read the article as soon as I have a few minutes! Best wishes, Antandrus (talk) 20:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I noticed this discussion (I happened to have Antandrus's talk page in my watchlist). If you want another peer review of the article from an Internet-savvy expert, you might try Margaret Mikulska. But she really is an expert, so be prepared for a real criticism. Here's why: go into Google Groups and search "Mikulska Lutoslawski Misplaced Pages". Towards the end of her posting she refers to the article as it was before you started the major upgrade. Actually I wrote to her about 6 weeks ago asking what she now thought of it, but she didn't reply. You may get a response. David Brooks 22:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

p.s. make sure her expectatations are set right. This is an general-audience encyclopedia, not a master's thesis. David Brooks

OMFG

Seriously now.  ;) —RaD Man (talk) 03:00, 18 August 2005 (UTC)