User talk:Meladina/Archive

Here is my Archive. (Meladina 12:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Greetings from the Opera Project!

Greetings from the Opera Project and thank you for your contributions about Russian music. I have left a comment on the Talk Page of the Elena Firsova (should it be Yelena?) page about the notability tag someone has put on this article. Perhaps you can respond if you have a moment? Best wishes. - Kleinzach 09:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Knaifel/Alexander Knayfel'

Hi. I see you have added Alexander Knaifel as well. Grove give his name as Alexander Knayfel'. We normally prefer to follow Grove. Is there a special reason to spell his name in a different way here? I realize that there are different ways of spelling Russian names, but we would like to be consistent and the easiest way for us to do that is probably to follow Grove. Best. Kleinzach 13:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are many reasons to leave the spelling Knaifel, as he himself normally spells his name in all Russian bilingual editions (I have some of his scores and records). The same spelling you can find in the Oxford Dictionary of Music and Lebrecht's Companion to 20th Century music

Grove is not always right.

If you spell on Google Knayfel it will redirect you to Knaifel.

The opera corpus

Thank you for new titles added to The opera corpus. This list is of works worthy of an article on Wikipedia. Will you be writing articles on these operas? (Of course, you can start with stubs if necessary.) Regards. Kleinzach 18:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message and your excellent new contributions. The material is very useful. I'd like to make a couple of suggestions. (1) to separate Historia von D. Johann Fausten into two articles. The opera would be Historia von D. Johann Fausten (opera). (I can do this for you if you like. (2) Simplify Alexander Aronovich Knayfel’ to Alexander Knayfel’ as the patronymic is not usually used on Wikipedia. I've made a few small corrections, typos etc. - Kleinzach 11:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I have made the changes as you have seen. I have also changed the category of Russian-language opera to German-language for the Faust.

We have the categories British Opera, German opera, Hungarian opera and Italian opera but that's all, no Russian opera. You could start one if you liked. - Kleinzach 14:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Ghost of Canterville

I am wondering whether this should be entitled The Canterville Ghost (opera). What do you think? Best. - Kleinzach 15:45, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the content for The Canterville Ghost (opera). Best - Kleinzach 18:05, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:L'ecume scene.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:L'ecume scene.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Russian opera category

Thanks for your message. I am sorry to say that have misled you about this (above). There are no categories for British, French opera etc. only articles on these subjects. The only categories which exist are French-language opera, English-language opera etc. So I don't think we should make a new category for Russian opera. On the other hand you could write an article on the subject and then refer to particular works. Does that help? - Kleinzach 17:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiery Angel

Grove has Ognennïy angel but I have no Russian! Have you seen the guidelines Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian and WP:CYR? What do they indicate? Kleinzach 17:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC) ый endings -y Красный = Krasny[reply]

I am really happy to leave this question to you. If you are following the Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian and WP:CYR then it should be fine. In this case we can forget about the Grove version. Of course you can ask Alex Bakharev but your judgement should be as good as his. - Kleinzach 19:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renard

Thanks for your correction, but why is it now Renard (theatre) (which should be a spoken play) rather than Renard (opera)? - Kleinzach 17:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed it back to Renard (opera) now. The fact it is also a ballet is no problem as the category provides a link. Kleinzach 18:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised this is controversial, however if it isn't regarded as an opera we can simply take it off our list. - Kleinzach 20:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Flood

Is there another opera called The Flood? If not it should really be The Flood (opera) rather than The Flood (Stravinsky). - Kleinzach 17:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alexey Verstovsky

Is this composer of any interest? We need some coverage! Best regards - Kleinzach 17:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I have done a small amount of editing. Will you do Askold's Grave as well? - Kleinzach 11:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fiery Angel (Prokofiev)

Arguably Ognenniy is closer to Russian pronunciation, but lets stick to the wikipedia guidelines. I have checked google, so Ognenny [1] provides 57 references, Ognenniy [2] provides 17 and Ognennïy [3] provides 24. Thus, there is no single common spelling and Ognenny is even slightly more common than both Ognenniy and Ognennïy combine. The rules for romanization also gives Ognenny. So I think we should use Ognenny. abakharev 20:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC

License tagging for Image:Chornaya shal.mid

Thanks for uploading Image:Chornaya shal.mid. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:L'ecume scene.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:L'ecume scene.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I borrowed this image from the book by Yury Kholopov and Valeria Tsenova: Edison Denisov, published in Moscow 1992, where it has been printed without the indication of the name of a photographer or copiright symbol. Denisov was my former teacher and close friend, and therefore I know that this photo was given to the authors by Denisov himself for the illustration of the staging of his opera L'ecume des Jours. Together with this three of my own photos were published in the same book (and nobody asked my permission for this). That time the copyright law did not exist in the Soviet Russia. I believe that the low-resolution image of this photo, let to say, promotional material, we can use in Wikipedia. However if someone have different opinion and convincing arguments, please do detete this image. (Meladina 23:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I think the best thing here is to list the image on Possibly Unfree Images. You can make your case there. Stifle (talk) 23:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evstigney Fomin

Hiya - In the article you write about Fomin having a father-in-law at the age of six. Did you mean stepfather? Cheers, Vizjim 12:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opera Project.

Welcome - it might be a good idea if you listed yourself among the participants on the project talk page. Cheers,Moreschi 18:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:L'ecume_scene.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:L'ecume_scene.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project composers

Hello. Is there a consensus I missed? I think you will find that it is not Wikipedia policy to link to project pages from the main article space, and I expect your links will all have to be removed. Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 12:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if that came over as a bit abrupt, but I thought it was better to stop you quickly, before you had a chance to work through too many articles! Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 12:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What would the advantage be? I think that all composer articles already are (or should be) in at least one "composers" category, and they already should have a link to composer in the lead. I really don't think we need any more than that; and we aren't here to publicise anything! In any case, I'm sure there are other priorities on Wikipedia that would employ your considerable talents better! --RobertG ♬ talk 12:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Provided there is no link to a project page, then my objection is not so forthright. I personally do not think that the logo adds anything to the article, and is therefore not worth your effort! Please alert me if more discussion develops elsewhere on this, but you have my opinion! Got to go. --RobertG ♬ talk 12:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I came across as at all unfriendly, earlier. I was a bit rushed for time. I have read a couple of the articles you have touched, and find them very fine; so I thought I'd drop by and say how much I appreciate the effort you have put into Ivan Kozlovsky (about whom I knew nothing), as just one example! --RobertG ♬ talk 13:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Opera

We are discussing at Talk:Opera whether or not Rock opera should be included in a list of the main opera genres. I don't know if you would like to express an opinion? Kleinzach 19:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of opera

In the course of this heated debate about rock opera - which I am basically against including in opera although there may be some works that can just squeeze through the door - I have written a so-called 'definition' of opera. I'd be interested to have your reaction. - Kleinzach 09:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. I saw that you wanted a hand with the Popov article, and I tried to assist. See the Popov talk page. There are a couple of things that need dates or clarifications. Regards, Ssilvers 19:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Meladina additional stuff

You didn't make this a userspace article, what with the lack of a colon (:), the slashes, and all that jazz. I think you may have wanted it in User:Meladina/additional stuff. ;) -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 23:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, someone beat me to it. I just moved it there and was going to message you about it... Hbdragon88 23:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Hall of Hermitage Theatre.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hall of Hermitage Theatre.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opera project

Hello, I think you should put notices that "the article is part of Russian opera project" on the articles' talk pages rather than in main space. It is common practice with other projects. Check any battle article, for instance. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Opera template

I have made you a template at Template:Russian opera. In order to reproduce this on any page, all you have to do is put the words Russian opera inside curly brackets {{ }}. You can also edit the template directly and all the pages with the box will change. - Kleinzach 20:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Comic Opera

There is a Wikipedia article called comic opera, but it does not have a section on Russian comic operas. Would you please take a look and consider whether it should have a section on Russian comic operas? Thanks! Regards, Ssilvers 12:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are some issues with the comic opera article to do with accuracy, duplication of material and lack of references. - Kleinzach 22:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Russian comic opera information. You may want to review my copy-edits. One funny thing is that you added a reference to the website of my friend Mitch Gillett. It is a very small world, as we say. Best regards, Ssilvers 13:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The beginnings of opera buffa

I have put a note on Talk:Opera buffa. You may wish to add some information. - Kleinzach 10:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Composer's Project.

I thought that I ought to let you know that the three articles you put on the Composer's Project talk page in a request for clean-up have been done by me - not that I have anything to do with the composer's project, but your charmingly worded title tugged at the strings of my heart. I've tried to remove the grammar and spelling mistakes, and also took the liberty of wikilinking a few terms here and there. If you want any more done, leave a note on my talk page and Kleinzach can have a rest. Keep up all your incredible work! Cheers, Moreschi 21:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Opera singer2.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Opera singer2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 23:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate articles

I noticed your note on Kleinzach's talk page. You can't merge two pages by moving them. You have to physically move the information that's missing from one to the other. Once that's done, you can redirect the title which is not preferred to the title which is preferred, by blanking everything on the "bad" page and putting#REDIRECT [[Yakov Knyazhnin]] (if that's where all the information is. Feel free to ask me any questions on my talk page, and if you have all the information under one title, but want it to be moved to the other title, only an admin can do that (which I am), so I'd be happy to do that if you give me the information. Sorry, I know it's a little confusing. Cheers, Mak (talk) 16:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sbitenshchik

I believe the opera should be called Sbiten Vendor. And we definitely need a separate article about sbiten. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 06:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Schnittke picture

Hi meladina,

I'm from Poland and I wrote an article about Alfred Schnittke (http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Schnittke). Now I would like to put there a picture of the composer. You claimed Alfred_Schnittke_April_6_1989_Moscow.jpg picture is taken by you. I ask you for your kind permission to publish it on Polish Wikipedia home page. (We have here strict rules concerning such materials, so I can't use your picture without your agree.)

Bye, w1k0

P.S. Excuse me, meladina. I overlooked your annotation about GNU Free Documentation License. Now everything is clear and all right. I'm new to Wikipedia. Never mind...

Translation request

Can you translate the "Legends" section of ru:Барсакельмес into English? Another Russian user had some problems with it. See the "Paranormal activity" section of en:Barsa-Kelmes for his version, which doesn't make much sense. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-20 12:08

Template

Thank you very much. Moreschi 13:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your new copy editor!

Moreschi has very kindly agreed to take over as your new copy editor! Unfortunately it looks as though I will be away for most of the summer and I am running down my watchlist etc. just concentrating on a few problem areas before I go. Keep up all the good work. Best wishes etc. - Kleinzach 14:10, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Edits

Remember to mark your edits as minor only when they genuinely are (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). "The rule of thumb is that an edit of a page that is spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'." Tuspm ^{Talk | Contribs | E-Mail Me} 16:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On July 10, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boris Sobinov, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Mgm|^(talk) 09:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Falconet - Pygmalion & Galatee (1763).jpg

Do you really think that the photograph was taken more than a century ago?? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 12:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As best I know, only two-dimensional scans of old works of art are considered private domain. The photograph could not have been taken 100 years ago because it is in colour. I believe we should use Template:Fairusein for such images, providing a source and rationale on the image page. Cheers, Ghirla ^-трёп- 13:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gaetano Donizetti

You have reverted all the grammatical, expression and spelling changes I made to your article. It makes no sense to me, unless it was done in error. Orbicle 09:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am referring to the changes made to the Gaetano Donizetti article of today's date. Check my changes. http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Gaetano_Donizetti&diff=64821825&oldid=64819573 and http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Gaetano_Donizetti&diff=64816480&oldid=64733534 . Thanks Orbicle 10:52, 20 July 2006

Thanks for your messages & for reverting back to my changes. Everything seems fine now. I am looking for a more felicitous phrase to 'reaching stature similar to Bellini's Norma'"... perhaps, arguably similar in stature to... Cheers

Orbicle 12:53, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mazeppa (opera)

I noticed that this Russian opera article has been expanded recently. You might want to take a look. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 13:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the division of Act III into scenes, as they don't seem to appear in the libretto. Mind ye, it may be that the one I'm looking at had been updated - older plays tend to divde scenes up like that (I remember being terribly confused by one of Congreve's plays until I realised what was going on in that respect), however, it's probably not useful now.

...Er... I'm also a bit confused as to why you added the chorus returning after Andrey's death. There's no music for them, and wouldn't that hurt the emotional impact of the final tableau? Vanished user 17:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, of course! Those are the divisions of the songs. Useful information, but probably best put into another section, as there's no pause between them. Vanished user 17:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've followed the Russian full text of libretto that divides the £ act into 6 scenes and the last scene begins with chorus. (meladina 17:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

...Odd. So why doesn't the one linked in the article divide them? Vanished user 18:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well, anyway, forgive me. It's a confusing opera anyway - you may have seen my little commetns saying "I think this is right" hidden in the text - and the best I can do with Russian is identify names and use context and knowledge of what I'm looking at to try and figure out the rest.

Though what Tchaikovsky/the librettist was thinking with brining the chorus back on to distract from Maria and Andrey's last scene... who knows? Just be glad it was changed! Vanished user 19:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it! Nice work on expanding out the other sections! Vanished user 15:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. thought I'd help out by expanding the list of numbers in Russian, but tehere's one or two oddities: "ой, гой, чумандра, чумандриха молода!" is given in the libretto as the last lines of the Drunken Cossack - which is a kind of odd place to divide the scene. Is this right? Vanished user 12:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should have the revised synopsis done by the end of the day, with any luck! By the way, I'm not that great at Cyrillic - you may want to check the transliterations I provided for the few missing words. (13 and 18) - the original Russian I pasted from the score. Vanished user 13:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that makes sense (about the Finale). Vanished user 13:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, "List of Songs" is somewhat of an ugly phrasing for something like Mazeppa - it's more accurate in the operettas I've been working on, since dialogue divides them so a "List of Songs" is a more valid. "Structure of Opera" or "Structure of the Opera" seems best to me - Libretto would imply the full text was being given. Vanished user 13:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, going to get some lunch - a bit late, then I'll start on the synopsis! I don't suppose you know offhand why Iskra is executed and not Andrey? I'm guessing he has a somewhat larger role in Pushkin's poem that makes it make more sense, but as Act I ends with Kobuchey warning Andrey that being the courier might result in his death, it's a little confusing how he survives Act II. Vanished user 13:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have started revisions. I need to ask, though: Which spelling should we use, the more accurate transliteration "Mazepa" or the traditional English spelling, "Mazeppa"? (Likewise, Mariya or Maria, Andrei or Andrey?) I'm inclined towards Mariya and Andrey, but, well, the opera is usually advertised in English as Mazeppa, which might make it confusing to use "Mazepa". On the other hand, Mazepa is more accurate, and means the link to "Ivan Mazepa" won't involve a change in spelling of name. Of course, just to make it worse, since the introduction is evidently evocative of Mazepa's ride, and so links to the Byronic poem, which is "Mazeppa" we can't really win there. Thoughts? Vanished user 15:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's very hard to judge throught Google, because, well, "Maria" is very common in romance languages - Spanish, Italian, and so on. That's going to skew the results heavily. For Andrei/Andrey, we face a similar transliteration proble,m since we don't want to be skewed too much by other Eastern European languages. To check, I compared Kochubey with Kochubei in Google. The results are 25,000 vs. 28,000, implying we can do what we want with -ey vs. -ei.

The Mazeppa search is worrying, however. Perhaps Mazeppa, Andrey (to mach Kochubey), and Mari(y)a? Vanished user 15:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. I think you should refer to the transliteration of the name of the opera on Adam's programme to see what people are using who actually peform the work. Also, do your books on Russian opera agree on the spelling? I don't think we should leave this one to google. of course, it really doesn't matter very much whether it is one "p" or two, as long as the references cited in the WP article agree with how you are using it.

2. For Maria/Mariya, I would go with Mariya, because it is more distinctly Russian. Maria is more usually an Italian or Spanish/hispanic name. So by spelling it with the "y", you give it a Russian flavor. I do not think google helps here, because google picks up all the non-Russian usages.

3. For Andrei/Andrey, I would go with the google answer here, because this name is particularly Russian (or at least slavic), and so google's consensus is more likely to be helpful. Personally, I find the Andrei spelling to look more typical and attractive for English usage.

I hope that helps! --Ssilvers 15:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The programme has two p's in Mazeppa. So, Mazeppa I guess it is? Vanished user 16:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right! Have a nasty headache, so think I'll have to rest a bit. Hopefully finish things by tomorrow. Vanished user 17:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...Why do Cyrillic letters, when italicised, completely change form? For instance, г is easy - it looks just like Greek, which I know well. But then it gets italicised and becomes г, which looks like an inverted s, and... well...

Certainly this isn't a fault of the language, but it's somewhat confusing to amateur liguists like meself. Vanished user 18:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll have a look about for a commercial translation of Poltava. Only trouble with them is that so often the translators, unlike the original authors, are not geniuses, and it shows rather badly. Still, better than nothing.

At a guess, given that Andrei was a late (but brilliant) addition to the plot, I suspect that Tchaikovsky didn't kill Andrey in Act II because he could do more interesting things with him in Act III. Certainly, he gets powerful scenes when he does appear, and if it's a little hard to track what happens to him between act I and act III, it doesn't make Act II or Act III any less powerful - for they are masterpieces. But it does fit in with the sort of minor unexplained plot point that often appears when a major change has taken place in an opera. Vanished user 23:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Boris Tishchenko.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Boris Tishchenko.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opera?

Hello Meladina. I hope that you had a good holiday. Anyway, I've popped around to ask a favour. I'm trying to get Opera up to good article status, and I wondered if you could find time to contribute a brief "Russsian opera" section, basically along the lines of my "English opera" bit, summarising the history of Russian opera and opera in Russia in a couple of paragraphs. I've reshuffled the article and added about 7 new paragraphs, so if you find anything else to improve, please do so! If you do decide to do this then I think it best if you leave a note on my talk page and I'll do the usual copy-edit job. Best wishes from Moreschi 17:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]