KrakatoaKatie is suffering from physical health issues. This may affect her ability to work on Wikipedia. Consequently, she may not be able to respond to talk-page messages or e-mails in a timely manner. Your patience is greatly appreciated.
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
B
This user is currently busy but should return shortly.
Thank you for standing for arbitrator. I am far away from it all (travel, mourning), not in the mood, so just an informal question you can answer or ignore:
I appreciate and thank you for the question, Gerda, but it tells me nothing. I don't have the first clue where you want me to go with that. Katietalk17:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, 11 years ago infoboxes for classical composers were a hot topic. If you look at the talk pages of the 5 composers, do you think they still are? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what you asked me to do, but okay – looks to me like the Mahler page doesn't have an infobox and there's a lively discussion going on about it. Crossing my fingers that it doesn't descend into chaos and misery. Katietalk13:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I was unclear. - November was rich in sadness and happiness for me, expressed in music. Regarding my question, I found one so far who looked into the matter and didn't stay at the surface, Simonm223. There are two composers on the Main page today, Siegfried Thiele and Aaron Copland. I find the response of my friend Jerome Kohl to a question on Copland's article talk promising. What do you think? - There were more participants in Mahler, and what do you think about the strength of arguments? - Have you ever seen an infobox discussion in "chaos and misery"? (More about compromise on my talk.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, infobox discussions. We've had how many cases about infoboxes at this point? People yelling and whining and getting blocked and retiring and unretiring and bans? If that's not chaos and misery, I don't know what is. As far as the strength of arguments goes, I just took a quick skim because some of the usual infobox folks are there and I've heard their peace before, and ain't nothin' new under the sun. Some poor schmuck is gonna close that and much angst and gnashing of teeth will ensue and I look forward to seeing the results of the Infobox discussions 48 case sometime in 2032. I wish I had more to give you about it, but I just don't.
I'm glad Simonm223 was able to give you an answer you liked, but I am not going to give an opinion on the strength or weakness of arguments there. I'm very sorry for the loss of your friend, and I hope the music you love helped bring you some peace. Katietalk16:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. My view is different and simple: infobox discussions happen only on the few FAs of a few editors (such as Mahler), and if we place them under some special protection for intentionally being different from the rest of Wikipedia, we are done. Most classical composers today come with an infobox without any discussion. - Today's story comes from a DYK about a concert that fascinated me, and you can listen! For my taste, the hook has too little music - I miss the unusual scoring and the specific dedication - but it comes instead with a name good for viewcount. All this is of minor importance looking at life and death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. - I can happily report that the Barber situation was resolved. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning members following their election by the community. Their two-year terms formally begin on 1 January 2025:
Outgoing members are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, to remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the functionaries' and arbitration clerks' mailing lists following their terms on the Arbitration Committee. To that effect:
Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing members, who have not chosen to retain them, after 31 December 2024:
CheckUser: Firefly, L235
Oversight: Firefly, Guerillero, L235, Moneytrees
Outgoing members are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. That will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
All outgoing members will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list.
All outgoing members will be unsubscribed from the clerks-l mailing list, with the exception of Firefly, Guerillero, and Moneytrees, who have chosen to remain subscribed.
