User talk:Kleinzach/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

AWB

Yes, I could have another go with AWB. Remind me what was involved. (Whether all the composers in the subcats were also listed at the top level. Was there more to it?) Occuli (talk) 17:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I came up with some lists and numbers at sandbox1, sandbox2, sandbox3, sandbox4, sandbox5 (these are redirects which should perhaps be changed). Feel free to edit/copy these at will. (It is quite complicated.) Occuli (talk) 21:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Transit of Venus

In reply to your note: I only came across it doing red link repairing, but the play is Transit of Venus, not The Transit of Venus, and I assume that would go for the opera too. Robina Fox (talk) 08:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Arts Project

I fail to see what use it is frankly, and it might be better to close it down. The only people who seem to watch the discussion page are you & I & we never agree on anything. Johnbod (talk) 11:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm busy at the moment so I don't want to waste time on this, but the point here is that it's an umbrella project. if there are no big problems it won't be active, but if there are it can be. It's not a bannering, quality-checking project, but it's there if we need it. It's important structurally. It's similar to other high-level projects. --Kleinzach 12:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

It won't be there at all if only 2 people have it on their watchlist, and the people who post notices there seem to be wasting their time - I think it would be only fair to warn them. Johnbod (talk) 13:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Opera corpus

I compiled a list for you with stats here User:Nrswanson/sandbox.Nrswanson (talk) 03:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Nyman navbox

I apoplogize, but it was wrong of you to simply revert the navbox. There will be at least stubs for all the redlinks present by the end of the week. I removed all the others that I'm not prepared to write about. The fact that your reversion eleiminated multiple blue links was cause for the insult, as that was totally inappropropriate and was very careless on your part. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 04:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I have removed all red links. To Scott, you can add them back once you have finish writing. - Jay (talk) 10:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

dyk

On 9 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article La púrpura de la rosa, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music#Sound_clips.2FFulda_Symphonic_Orchestra_recordings_etc.

...Kleinzach... if you're going to criticise the Featured sound project and the use of recordings on Wikipedia, it would be nice if you A.) Actually knew who made the recordings, and B.) checked that when you say things were "recently added" that this is, in fact true, given your example was added to the article in January 2006 and has been a stable part of that article ever since. If your basic argument has any merit, it's not going to come out under such circumstances.

If you like, I'm willing to delete and rewrite my post after you've revised yours. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 10:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

In view of the deletion of my reply here I am not going to respond to this. --Kleinzach 23:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Please return to WikProject Media franchises

Dear Kleinzach...You are invited to come back to discuss WikiProject Media franchises. Since you participated in one or more discussions of the project, possibly when it was known as WikiProject Fictional series, I hope to see you return to it. The project needs your participation. Currently there is no activity on the project's talk page about the reorganization which is discouraging. I had great expectations for this project as it touches so many topics but am becoming discouraged. I hope to see you return. LA (If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.) @ 19:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The opera corpus

Yes, I've seen that there was a problem from the WPO Talk page, but have only just now caught up with it. I'm afraid that we probably do need some more clearly defined criteria which will enable us to revert unwelcome deletions (additions aren't a problem, so the situation is the exact reverse of that at the List of important operas). A last resort would be to withdraw it from WP as such and return it to Worklist status in WPO, which would be a pity, IMO.

I'm still not really back in action - off to the ROH this Friday, Scotland for 10 days a week later, Cardiff (Jenufa/Otello) in early October, Wexford in late October - plus my wireless access to the Internet is fairly flakey at present from late afternoon until about now (I probably need to upgrade security from WEP to stop piggy-backers). I'm still keen on doing some assessing when I've stopped travelling - not least to reduce the number of auto-assigned Starts - but it's difficult to see how to devise a foolproof scheme that won't accidentally miss anything out.

Also, the 5000 article PR stuff - I'll be happy to send out any agreed text next week, but the earlier the better as I'm not anticipating much Internet (or even letterbox) access at Kilberry, Skye, Lochinver, etc. Best. --GuillaumeTell 00:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Assessments again/GT

Fine. I won't be able to do much, if anything, until November, anyway, as things have worked out. Whenever I go away, even for short periods, it takes forever to catch up with my watchlist, email and what have you. Doing the B-class is fine, but what about the GAs? Put them up for peer review, maybe? (Brian Boulton seems to have a lot of experience in this sort of area - is it worth conferring with him?) Or don't you think that trying for FA is worth bothering with? At the very least, it would be good if the GAs had some comments on their /comments pages. Best. --GuillaumeTell 15:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

That's clearer, thanks, and I agree in general. I'll perhaps have a bit more to say later this weekend. --GuillaumeTell 00:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Assessments again/Smerus

Yes, please fill me in re assessments and I'll see what I can do --Smerus (talk) 16:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm, like yourself, middle of the road re assessments - but I would be glad to get involved. However until mid-October my time is going to be largely taken up with the music festival I am organising - after that I am likely to be freer. I will mention you to Jeremy next time I drop by his auto-icon. Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 11:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Remove this image

Hi, as you remove the section urging people not to remove the placeholder-images would you mind commenting on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AmeliorationBot 2? Thanks, ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 16:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Le Villi

Hi Kleinzach, give a look here and here. It's important to come back quickly to the right capitalization before other wikis adopt the wrong one on the basis of en.wiki. Thanks --Al Pereira(talk) 23:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I've explained on the Opera Project page. --Kleinzach 23:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Die weisse Rose (opera)

Normally I would agree with your comments but this time the name change to (opera) was chosen intentionally. In this case I think Die weisse Rose (opera) should be the title because Die weisse Rose is the actual name of the student movement and the majority people typing that in will be looking for the student movent and not the opera. Also, it would be disrespecful for the opera to take the exact title of the student movement. There is an issue of sensitivity here.Nrswanson (talk) 08:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you in general practice but not in this case. If you look at the Die weisse Rose page, someone already reverted your redirect from the opera back to the Student movement. If I had named the opera page that someone else would have moved it, complained heavily and/or started an edit war. As for Scanderbeg (opera), I didn't create that page and my general practice has been to follow your policy (as in The Red Line which was a redirect). I understand about your bad mood and there is grace here for you.Nrswanson (talk) 08:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot runs

Hi, certainly, what needs doing? If you give me the list of cats and what tags need adding then I can set the process going. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 19:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

To limit the number of false-positives, I will run through the pages that transclude the various stub templates listed at the WPCLASSICAL project page. Based on a quick sample, many, many articles with these templates do not have the class=stub parameter on the talk page. This run should significantly cut down the workload of your human assessors. Later on I can use my other assessment process to assess for other categories if you want. I'll do 50 edits as a start, then they can be checked, etc. before I let the bot loose on the 8000+ other pages! RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 20:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Test/trial  Done, everything went well to my eyes, if you agree then I can do the rest of the transclusions. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 20:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Argh! That's what happens when you're lazy and use an AWB plugin instead of coding your own stuff! Sorry about that, but the reason that I can't use the cat and then look for stub templates is that that would require editing one page based on another, which is extremely complex to code. What I now plan to do instead is the following. When we agree, I can restart the bot using custom code:

• Take the list of transclusions from the various relevant stub templates.
• If and only if the classical banner exists, and no rating is present, rate the article as a Stub.
• If the importance= parameter already exists in the classical banner, strip it out seeing as the project does not use it.

Hopefully this will be completely bugproof, but I will do a few demonstration edits in my userspace to check first. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 19:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the inactivity, but I should be ready to start this process tomorrow (1st) if you still want me to. Don't worry about the different stub templates, I'll try to cover as many as humanly (or bot-ly) possible (and if I go through extraneous ones it won't matter seeing as the bot will only modify existing Classical project templates). RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 19:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've done a quick trial run of ~40 edits (the module took longer to code than I anticipated) which you can check by looking at my bot's contributions. I can see nothing wrong, and if you agree I can start the main run. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 19:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll run through all of the classical stubs, and then see if there are any other stub templates that may be relevant. My internet connection has been playing up recently, so I may not be able to run the process every day, but the job will get done! RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 16:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

La bohème

I trust this meets with satisfaction? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 12:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Didn't we have this one before? --Kleinzach 23:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

This is the one with a very careful restoration - trying to remove the pops and scratches without affecting the singing. Also, I apologise about the information - I clearly missed a link by you, and frankly, trust you a lot more than the Internet Archive =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 09:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Janáček

Hi. You've changed some start-class composers to B-class recently. Can you look at Janáček and weigh up, whether it's possible to change the assessment in this case? Thank you. Vejvančický (talk) 09:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I've put it as B-class but this is purely nominal. I hope the Composers Project will start ratings and give a proper written assessment to the article. By the way, how are the media files? Are they OK? --Kleinzach 09:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

How are you?

You have been rather quiet at the project the last few days. I know you may not be happy with some of the recent changes but I still value your opinion. I hope you aren't backing away from things because of ill feelings. Also, I am happy to help with you with some of the "janitor work" at the project if you just let me know in what way I can do it.Nrswanson (talk) 12:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd recommend you take a rest from the Opera Project. Maybe read a book instead or listen to some music? --Kleinzach 14:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... That wasn't exactly the response I was hoping for. I take it you don't appriciate my contributions then.Nrswanson (talk) 14:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes. --Kleinzach 15:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Well Kleinzach... I don't know what to say to that. I'm guessing you really aren't interested in talking to me so I will leave you alone. I still think your voice is needed on the current state of things with the stubs but do what you will.Nrswanson (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go

Kleinzach, I just wanted to say that I am sorry to see you go and I hope you will reconsider your decision. I don't think anyone within the project itself thinks you were trying to "own" the project and your contributions are highly valued. If your mind is set and we can not persuade you to return, would you consider communicating to the project what all you were doing to maintain the smooth running of the project. It would be a shame for things to fall apart after all the hard work you have put in. Thank you.Nrswanson (talk) 15:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Classical music

Actually I have been thinking to help to manage the portal (even before I started Opera portal) but I wasn’t sure whether the “owner” or members of Classical Music like the idea of someone else changing their portal. If it is ok with them, I do not mind helping. - Jay (talk) 03:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok then, I will work on the portal very soon - Jay (talk) 07:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I have made lot of changes including the color, table format, some "coding", adding read more and archived pages etc. Hit "Purge server cache" at the bottom of the page if you cant see the changes. - Jay (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks great. I'll tell the project. Are you intending to change the text regularly? Perhaps every three months? Every month would be great but probably not necessary. We can ask project members to make suggestions as for the Opera Portal. Best. --Kleinzach 07:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I have made a suggestion in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music - Jay (talk) 07:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, what a charming thing's a battle

This isn't meant to convince you, but, thought you should know:

Actually, I put quite a bit of work into that song - it took significant research to get the provenance details, then I wrote an article about the opera it was from, in order to set a good example. Admittedly it didn't need much cleanup, but it's not like I slacked and took a ridiculously easy option =)

Your reasons for disliking the song seem reasonable - even if I don't agree - but I do put a lot of work into most of the things I nominate. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I look at each case on its own merits. As you know, I have supported many of your nominations. In this case I don't think it's up to standard. I also think there is a danger of our wasting too much time considering recordings of unfamiliar, obscure works that don't illustrate anything of any obvious notability. --Kleinzach 07:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Leaving WP:WPO

Hi Kleinzach, I've received an anxious message about your backing away from involvement in WP:WPO. I know that there has been some discussion about stub classification to which I was not paying much attention. Your contribution has been invauable. I hope that we are not losing you altogether.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

As explained here, I'm no longer 'janitoring' the Opera Project. There are some major issues there developing out of the stub controversy, but I've chosen not to get involved any further. Ultimately the only answer you can make to project OWNership charges and accusations is to walk away and DISOWN it all completely. I've suggested WP:WPO elect a project coordinator.

I'm still on Wagner, Classical music, Composers, and Music projects and I look forward to working with you on those projects. Best wishes. --Kleinzach 07:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. It's unfortunate it's got to this stage, but I understand our decision. Perhaps after an appropriate amount of time has passed you might feel able to return. I've just resumed my PhD, so I don't expect to have time for any major contribution in the next few months at least.--Peter cohen (talk) 14:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

My decision was an objective one based on the state of the project. It will probably only get worse in time. (BTW I see they haven't acted on my suggestion to elect a project coordinator. Hardly surprising!) Best. --Kleinzach 23:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Dvořák media files

Hi again. Media files may be of course a great improving of the articles, however, I have some reservations to the recordings on Dvořák's page:

This first one is absolutely unintelligible, the singer's voice is blurred, and whole recording gives us not good idea of Dvořák's cycle. However, isn't it better than nothing??

No. We've discussed this problem before. If the recording is not good, then IMO we should not use it. Unfortunately this has been made a 'featured sound'. If you want to get it deleted from the article and downgraded I'd be happy to review it. --Kleinzach 10:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Huh, a featured sound... You're right, I've found it. 100% support, but any musicological point of view. One opinion: ...very relaxing & good quality on the sound... It's not very relaxing for me to listen to it. The piano part is not bad, I have concerns particularly to the singer, as I described above. I've missed it... I think it's maybe good to have it here, but as one of the best media files on wikipedia?? In that case, almost every sound may be a featured sound:) What do you think about this recording? Thanks Vejvančický (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The recording quality is poor. It's distorted. (I haven't listen to all of it.) Musically it may be OK - but you will be a better judge of this. I don't know the work, the singer or have any Czech. --Kleinzach 09:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The second representation of Dvořák's style is also rather amateur, a raw sound quality, bad dynamics and tuning... I'm not a critic, just a music fan, but I think, this is not really representative.

I agree I've deleted it from the Dvořák page. --Kleinzach 10:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I have to admit, I often rather don't play the audio files, since the sound quality, as well as quality of the performance are bad. On the other hand, I know, it's not easy to find available recordings of better quality.

Where did you leave your 'remark'? --Kleinzach 09:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry: ...a featured sound... You're right, I've found it. 100% support, but any musicological point of view. One opinion: ...very relaxing & good quality on the sound... It's not very relaxing for me to listen to it. The piano part is not bad, I have concerns particularly to the singer, as I described above. I've missed it... I think it's maybe good to have it here, but as one of the best media files on wikipedia?? In that case, almost every sound may be a featured sound:)

That "remark" is my opinion on the strange assessment of some featured sounds. We have complicated and very strict assessment of good and featured articles. It´s surprising for me, that bad and not appropriate recording is as well "featured". And moreover, its assessment is not sufficient. I´ll try to participate more actively in that area. Unfortunately, I contribute from several computers, and I cannot play the media files on my computer at this very moment. Vejvančický (talk) 07:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, now I understand - you just left your opinion here - nowhere else. Would you like to add it to Image talk:Ten Biblical Songs by Antonin Dvorak.ogg? We can then attempt to get it demoted.--Kleinzach 08:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation sound clip

Another question: I would like to add the sound help (e.g. ) with Czech pronunciation to the Czech music related articles, but I simply don't know how. It may be useful improving, don't you think? Thanks. Have a nice day. Vejvančický (talk) 09:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this would be useful - but I don't know how to do it. I'll have a look and let you know if I find anything. --Kleinzach 10:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I came here to ask a question, got carried off looking for answer for this, and completely forgot what I was about to ask you... Oh well, I'll remember it. You can either use {{Audio-IPA|name of sound file|IPA notation|lang=Language}} or if you don't want the IPA you can use {{Audio|name of sound file|text to use as link to soundfile}}. Hope that helps! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 21:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, I´ll try to do something with it. Kleinzach, I´ve left a short remark with a question on Dvořák´s "featured sound" above. Best. Vejvančický (talk) 08:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Is this O. K.?: (Jenůfa) I've already added it to the article. Vejvančický (talk) 22:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't work for me. I'll ask §hep. --Kleinzach 22:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Perfect! When you click the word/icon it brings up the file to open on my computer. I don't have anything that plays .ogg though, need to download something. But when I click on info it brings me to the sound page and plays excellently. If you have IE I'm pretty sure there's a Java Script problem so .ogg's won't play, but it works in Firefox and others. Nice file btw, very crisp. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 01:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

§hep: if you look above you'll see two .ogg files (e.g. carnival overture, op. 92.ogg) that play on this page without downloading the file. IMO that's what we need for the pronunciation. --Kleinzach 07:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's not how articles work...pronunciations are always like that. If, for instance you have a song it would go under a media subheading with

Carnival Overture, Op. 92

Performed by the Skidmore College Orchestra. Courtesy of Musopen

But for it to be inline there is no play button. I was looking for an example and found Ohio, which has the same layout. Maybe this category will help? Sorry. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 16:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Someone was doing these short pronunciation clips before and they weren't configured like Ohio. I'll see if I can find an example. It simply isn't practical to expect people to download and then play them, it's too clunky, they won't do it. --Kleinzach 23:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy to see it, I agree it's a bit different. But really if you have the right software all you do is click the link and click open. I'll keep an eye out as well. Best, §hep • ¡Talk to me! 00:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

It's possible that my own configuration (Safari/Mac) has changed without my being aware of it. That might be the problem. --Kleinzach 00:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm beginning to think it isn't my configuration. In the case of (Jenůfa) I can get the sound if I click in info - but not if I use the sound symbol (which just start a download). --Kleinzach 23:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)