Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Thanks for visiting my talk page! You may e-mail me if the matter is not one you would like to discuss here by clicking this link; otherwise, please leave a new message at the bottom of the page. Remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) to record your signature and time of correspondence. Also, please follow regular protocol for talk pages, which includes assuming good faith and maintaining sanity and respectability (which probably isn't a guideline on WP but is to me).
If you place a comment here, I will respond to it here; likewise, if I place a comment on your page, please respond to it there. I will only respond on your page if follow-up on mine has not been reached for three or four days.
I will normally respond to any questions, comments, corrections, or other messages of the sort normally within 48 hours. Thanks always, --Pianísta!
CompUSA Article...
I just wanted to thank you for your recent CONSTRUCTIVE edit to the article! You are the first person in a month that has not edited the article for the purposes of vandalism, personal venting or maliciousness. Kudos! Edit Centric (talk) 19:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Midorihana has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
It seems that that IP does have a history of vandalism; however, (as noted here), admins usually don't block IPs indefinitely because IPs can belong to a wide array of editors and affect many people.
Yes, anyone can (and should) issue warnings to other editors when they vandalize (like here). Template messages for warning can be found at Misplaced Pages:Template messages/User talk namespace. The templates have 'levels'; if the editor vandalized once, then place a level one template; if the editor vandalized twice, place a level two template etc. If the editor vandalizes after you issue a warning from the fourth level, then the next step would be to report them to Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism.
If you have any more questions or anything, just leave a message on my talk page. :) Happy editing, Midorihana07:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC) P.S. I'm not an admin, by the way :)
By the way, did you try to enter in the raw code for your signature in Special:Preferences so you don't have to keep on changing it? I had problems with that too, but it eventually worked out. Midorihana09:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for including the required capitalizations in the A bug's land article. I'm wondering if you find this change sufficient to remove the template on the top of the page, which indicates it as needing capitalizing.
Just wanted to thank you for the hearty welcome! Its nice to meet a fellow WikiGnome. =D I'll see you around and happy Wikiing! house of elevenstalk 16:38 5-2-08 —Preceding comment was added at 05:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi MusicalConnoisseur, I was away for a bit so I missed the Chopin PR. Just looking at it now, and nice work so far. It needs a bit of work yet to conform with the WP:MOS, but is strong in terms of content which, lets face it, is all that counts. I'll let you know when I'm done and you might take it from there. Are you interested in building up the page. Ceoil (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. By the way, I wasn't planning on closing the PR so quickly... Anyhow, my focus is mainly to cite many of the dubious statements and to do some critical, repeat critical, face-lifts on the "Pop culture" section. Thanks again! --~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical?20:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for consulting me! I hate to admit this, but I found very little that was wrong with the article. However, I have replied nonetheless and have contributed as much as possible to the article. I'll bet it will be FA sometime soon. --~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical?06:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/backlog.
There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).
If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch><>°00:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the very helpful and constructive comments. I'm going to try to address most of them today, but I might not get them all finished before I have to leave town for the next week and a half. Thanks again! Ealdgyth - Talk15:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
You're using this bot, which the creator says he has disassociated himself from. Apparently this works but is malfunctioning. Craziness... you could try disabling and enabling the code and seeing if that makes any difference... Master of PuppetsCall me MoP!☺17:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. I have responded at the Chopin discussion page to your concern about NPOV, which I hope will enable us to move forward with a revision of the existing 'Death' section. Jean de Beaumont (talk) 11:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi again, I have put a proposal for a revised 'Death' section in my sandbox. As far as I can see, the substance of the footnotes with original source refencenses is not visible (would you need to see them first?). Greatful for your comments: http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Jeandebeaumont/Sandbox
I have just uploaded my sandbox to revise the existing 'Death' structure. I hope you find it ok, but your further guidance would of course be helpful. Jean de Beaumont (talk) 13:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like to edit a few things here and there...would you like me to edit your sandbox or the Chopin page directly?
Further, I have a few more comments that might be of help. Some of the references, however, may need to state a specific source, like a music dictionary, encyclopedia (Oxford is best), or professional Chopin website. It is all right to cite personal letters as a reference, but citation is most troublesome because it uses reasoning, not solid facts, to state its case. But it would be less controversial if some of the references pointed to a specific author who has experience in the field. This I cannot edit because I need to know from exactly what source you retrieved your information.
Further (though I know I must sound so dreadfully severe, I know), maybe this section is a bit too detailed. Once, I was forced to drastically reduce an article, see here, and I hope that the same won't happen to this section in the future. Instead, let's try to condense it beforehand, mentioning a tiny morsel about Jenny Lind, for example.--~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical?14:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your comments. -
1. I suggest you first edit in my sandbox to avoid any confusion of visitors to the Chopin article, while you and I discuss / edit the issues.
2. Any Oxford source would no doubt be helpfup. The problem with "professional Chopin" sources and various well-known authors is that many cite or copy Fr. Niecks or Arthur Hedley on 1848-1849, and they are demonstrably wrong on several points as shown by Icons of Europe's new research (e.g. the myths about Jane Stirling's role and Chopin's friends arranging the funeral), or they do not explain some significant facts (e.g. Chopin's suddenly elegant lifestyle in Britain and Paris; Lind's important role).
3. I presume "citation " is about the "monarchs" (easy to revise to facts).
4. On which information would you need 'exact sources'?
5. I trust your ability to "condense" the section, although I think it is more the notes (responding to your earlier request for evidence :-) than the text in the section that are too detailed. Jean de Beaumont (talk) 11:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I have read the discussion and given my two cents. Plus... my answer to reply 4. would be probably all of the sources. In other words, they need to be placed in biblography format, listing the title of the work, the author, when it was written, possibly the publisher, etc. I'm sorry, but cites based on other facts (which themselves do not have "valid" cites) may not be considered reliable. As to the length of the cites (addressed in reply 5.), they may be condensed yourself by the bibliographic method I mentioned earlier. I'll fix a few of the usual copyediting that I normally do, but the rest of the factual information and citations should be edited by the retriever of that information, in other words - Jean de beaumont. We'll collaborate and see the outcome. :)--~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical?03:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I should be more specific...by bibliographic form, I mean, for example, <ref>Title=The Lengthy Reply to Jean de Beaumont; Year=2008; Author=MusicalConnoisseur; Publisher=Misplaced Pages</ref>. This succinct approach will make the references clearer and more concise. --~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical?03:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I first saw you comment now as I uploaded the shorter version in http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Jeandebeaumont/Sandbox at the same time. I understand what you mean by 'bibliographic' references. However, several original letters have not been published, but are still key evidence. Could Icons of Europe research reports reviewed at expert roundtables in Warsaw (2004) and Edinburgh (2005) and the agreed minutes be referenced? It would be helpful if you could edit at least some of the new sandbox proposal which attempts to focus on what is relevant and 'known' :-) . Jean de Beaumont (talk) 14:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I just discovered that my sandbox with the proposed shorter version of the Final two years has been emptied by somebody. I can see that my earlier 'longer' version is still online. Where do we go from here? Do you want me to restore the sandbox? Jean de Beaumont (talk) 12:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
(no indent) I don't understand what you mean by "emptied." =) It's still the same as it was earlier...
Just in case I misunderstood entirely, if it was emptied, I recommend that the sandbox be restored to its revised, shorter version. --~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical?04:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Prank
Thanks for the smile
Putting a fake new message bar on your page was a great idea, I really fell for it
here's a smile for making my day
Smart Guy has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I used the Fake message thing. I did click on it but I new what it was. REMOVE IT I almost got blocked because of it. To avoid warning I'd get rid of it before someone does get unhappy and report it. Chubbennaitor(leave me a message!)11:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could peer review the page Forensic Entomology and popular culture. My group and I created it as a part of a school project. Many thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.180.10.107) 15:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow! Thank you so much for your awesome comments!! I can't tell you how helpful this is!! I'm now working on implementing your edits. Sorry about not signing...I'm still kinda new to wikipedia. entogirl88 (talk) 06:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I've done my best to make the changes you have suggested. Thank you again so much for your willingness to help! I was wondering if you could take one more brief look at our article and tell me whether it is more in keeping with wikipedia standards. YOU ROCK! entogirl88 (talk) 08:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Ha ha, thanks! People have said that I'm a nice kid, or every once in a while, "cool," but no one ever has said I rock. Ergo, you rock. =)
I was wondering if you could take a look at the Tokyo Tower article. I recently completely overhauled it. I have been staring at it and working on it for far too long, and I need someone with a critical eye to make sure it is on track in terms of grammar and organization. Many thanks! Torsodog (talk) 00:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks so much! It was a great and extensive PR that helped a lot (though some of the suggestions made me feel a bit stupid :) Anyways, I've implemented most of the smaller suggestions and will be working on the rest of the bigger rewrites later in the week. Thanks again! Torsodog (talk) 19:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
P.S. Your name change threw me off of a few mins!
Signature problem
I recently changed my signature to this: ]]
When I tried to set it as my raw signature, I received the "Invalid raw signature" message, but I think I've followed all HTML rules. Am I right or wrong? --Pianísta!03:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
It probably doesn't like where you closed the sup tags. Try this (it's shorter as well):
It looks fine to me. Seems you just added a couple newlines in - if it keeps happening, make sure there aren't any weird spaces at the end of your signature code in preferences. And you're welcome. :-) Hersfold04:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I've changed my name...actually, I'm kinda having second thoughts about it too. It's too girly, for one thing (even though I am a girl). Any suggestions? --Pianísta!04:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
On another note, I want to start getting serious with listening to classical music. I'd like to know what kind of starting points you could suggest for me. The compositions themselves I don't have trouble with picking what to listen to, the problem is with the recordings. What sources are your favorites for reviews on classical performances that have been recorded? Thanks! Voyaging01:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for consulting me. I'll finish that peer review by sometime tonight, promise.
As for the "other note," I would say the BBC is a pretty good choice (see under "album reviews" here). But lately, I haven't seen any good reviews from anybody. The press seems to be murdering everyone put in the spotlight - Lang Lang, Daniel Barenboim, etc. All I can say is listen to audio samples whenever you can and find the sound that suits you best. In regards to recordings, I like EMI and Deutsche Grammophon best. As to "starting points" in general, I could give you myriad ways to begin. Please elaborate. ;-) --Pianísta!00:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
By starting points, I mean basically this: if you were trying to start someone listening to classical music, what compositions and recordings would you suggest them to listen to? Voyaging15:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
In that case, I would suggest the classics and a few favorites-
By the way, when watching YouTube videos, I find it best not to scroll down to the comments. People can be so boisterous, vulgar, and whiny that it's depressing...
Thanks so much! It does help, very much so. Beethoven's Symphony No. 9 is the one classical piece I am VERY familiar with. The rest (save for Symphony No. 5) I don't think I've heard, so thanks for the list! Thanks for the peer review as well! Voyaging19:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Status
I'm so sorry I forgot! That's horrible of me, I humbly apologize. Sometimes I think I'm too forgetful, but then if I wasn't where would all the fun lie? :) Oh, and please do call me MoP, or anything you'd like, I don't mind.
Now, onto statusbot; your old username didn't seem to have a page (sorry I linked improperly last time), and your current one doesn't either; apparently said pages need to exist for the bot to work. If you'd like, I can go hunt for a page that is working and copy it to yours to see if that fixes anything. Cheers, and sorry 'bout the wait, Master of PuppetsCall me MoP! :)05:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, don't worry about it, MoP. I'm pretty forgetful, too (once, I went to my room to get a pencil, but when I got there, I forgot what I was looking for). :-P Don't get me wrong, though...I'm no old geezer, just a highly forgetful teen.
As for the page...please do make one. I'm far from tech-savvy; my skills practically end at wiki-markup. Thanks for all your help!
I've gone on huge hunts for things I was holding in my hand at the time, so I guess we're both forgetful. :P And I'll go and make the page, then; it should work, though I've never used StatusBot so it may not. In case it doesn't, my apologies. Cheers, Master of PuppetsCall me MoP! :)04:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm; StatusBot, or one of the bots, should be updating the page automatically. I'm not quite sure why they aren't. I'm gonna try to remove the template from your talk page and see if that helps at all. Master of PuppetsCall me MoP! :)20:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Requesting a little help... :)
Hi there! I nominated the S Club article for LOCE way back in January however I have had no joy, and I have recently nominated the article for FAC which means it should have been copyedited already. I was just wondering if you could help in copyediting the article for me? You don't have to, but any help would be very much appriciated. Thank you. :) - ǀ Mikay ǀ18:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Mikay. I'll try my best...though I've been busy lately. Uh, scratch that, I've always been pretty busy in real life. ;-) Sorry bud, but if it's okay with you, I'll probably do my copyediting in little installments; maybe one or two sections per day. Is that all right? =) --Pianísta!03:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm looking to sort out the Synthesizer article -- I have listed it on WP:Peer Review, and I was wondering if you would like to review it or contribute in some way, if you have the spare time. Don't worry if not - this is going to takes months to get up to Featured Article standard, considering how it looks now. Thanks! — Wackymacs (talk) 17:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm making edits to the article every day - it already looks quite different than it did a few days ago, but I would certainly appreciate your help with this. :-) — Wackymacs (talk) 14:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Pointy things
Thank you for the present, La Pianista. I will hang it atop my virtual Bösendorfer to add some sparkle to my futile attempts to tickle the ivies or whatever.
Fortunately for the rest of humankind, the pinnacle of my musical career was reached in kindergarten with the playing of the triangle. Considering that only two doors up the road some old geezer had scribbled on his Eroica - admittedly some years prior - I was not exactly in the prodigy toddler class... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
