User talk:Eebahgum

Archives

1, 2, 3

Magnificent job. Bashereyre (talk) 13:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November

Thank you for the exquisite translation of the convoluted title page from Christian Flor! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

look for bright memories --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

look today at BB music, a little crusade of mine ;) - his birthday on St Cecilia's day, patron saint of music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:07, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today's DYK: to be sung "happily" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:36, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk today, - it's rare that a person is pictured when a dream comes true, and that the picture is shown on the Main page on a meaningful day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You were around when I created my first article, and we enjoyed new music, pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say well done for your improvements to the Anthony Hussey article, which is now an engaging and credibly referenced biography rather than the obscure stub of yesteryear. Apologies too for evidently misreading the Senior article as noted here - will dig it out and see what it was actually intending to say. But either way, thanks for your work on it. -- Euryalus (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January songs

in friendship

Thank you for being around, and your good wishes! - Happy new year, in friendship! - One of my pics was on the Main page (DYK) and even made the stats. - In this young year, I enjoyed meetings with friends in real life, and wish you many of those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for wonderful stories on my talk! update: we have now a singer pictured, the Thomaskantor pictured better, and one more day of my pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda - sorry, I seem to have started a blog thread on your talkpage! How kind of folk to trouble to read and reply. Think of it as a celebration of my 10th Anniversary as an awesome wikipedian (though maybe I was awesome before that???? - !) which I owe entirely to you. Kind regards, Eebahgum (talk) 01:47, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I love that "blog", - what a great topic! As I just explained on that talk: I archive at my discretion, and I'll archive someone telling me that they alone are right and thousands of articles need change, much sooner than "yours" ;) - You must have been awesome before Precious, but I'm sometimes slow to notice ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February songs

frozen

my joy - more on my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:24, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valentine's Day edition, with spring flowers and plenty of music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March songs

Listening to the charity concert mentioned here. I created the articles of the composer and the soprano. An die Freude to come now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now, you can also listen on YouTube, and more music, the piece by Anna Korsun begins after about one hour, and the voices call "Freiheit!" (freedom, instead of "Freude", joy). Music every day, pictured in songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers, and btw: the TFA is a young writer's first --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:01, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday flowers and sounds, don't miss the extraordinary marriage of the beginnings of the theme of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1, and Prayer for Ukraine - here! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:46, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

stand and sing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I took a pic in 2009 that was on the German MP yesterday, with the song from 1885, in English Prayer for Ukraine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:00, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quintetto Chigiano is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quintetto Chigiano until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

• Retain, and tag for additional refs and inline citations. The article on the Quintetto Chigiano was written as a "starter" stub several years ago, and needs more adequate verification sources listed inline: I agree. However it was certainly a notable classical ensemble, and if the page is removed it will in due course be necessary to replace it. As it stands, the reference listed under "Sources" as Sackville-West and Shawe-Taylor, together with the selection of Decca recordings listed with their reference data, ought to be sufficient to verify their notability for the purposes of a "stub", which this is. I suggest that, rather than deletion, it would be more useful and appropriate to tag the page with a request for (a) additional references and (b) more specific inline citation, and allow a further amount of additional time for these to be found and added.Eebahgum (talk) 14:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John White (bishop), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Pitts.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh flowers for you! -

You probably need to slow down and reduce this reliance on Primary Sources, or cut text. You should also make it clear that you are relying on very old sources in the text. Boynamedsue (talk) 04:01, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've cut a lot from this page, I just wanted to say that the research you did on there was actually really worthwhile. It's a shame the rules argue against it, if all OR was like yours we would probably be ok with it! All the best anyway. Boynamedsue (talk) 17:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't accept your description of my work as Original Research, though I agree with you that the bit I deleted was overly dependent on primary sources. But then, it was just work in progress, and would have been condensed to essentials had I decided to continue. You make no distinction between Research, which is necessary for any properly-verified article, and Original Research, which we avoid. Primary sources are not forbidden in wikipedia, only an excessive dependency upon them, or any argumentative synthesis of them. If, as for instance in the History of Parliament articles, sources in the Patent Rolls or State Papers, or Privy Council, have been cited by a modern authority, it can hardly be considered Original Research to check out the sources given by a modern author, and to provide in-text supplementary footnote citations and links to the specific places which have been referred to. That is simply good practise for verification, and helpful editing for the reader who hasn't the time to do the verifications for themself. The published Calendars are in any case comparatively recent edited resources, not in themselves primary documents. If I had been digging into primary manuscript sources you might call it original research: but even a proved will is a published document, and simply to cite its existence in a modern catalogue of for instance the P.C.C. register, does not amount to original research, but is subsidiary verification from a modern catalogue. And it is standard practise in modern historical writing to refer to the Catalogues and Calendars in this way. Similarly it does no harm to include references to the Harleian pedigrees, where these are routinely referred to in the historical literature, and it is surely better to allow the reader to see what the source says, through an inline citation with external link, than to omit the very materials on which the historical secondary sources are drawing. Indeed, to exclude them is to make an arbitrary censorship of relevant and pertinent information. The difficulty is not that the Visitation Pedigrees often do not tell the full truth (as often they do not), but rather, that the wikipedia reader may not know what the Visitations were nor what their shortcomings as evidence might be. That is not the fault of an article on John Killigrew, but the failure of Wikipedia to produce an adequate Encyclopedia article on "The uses of heraldic pedigrees as historical evidence" - etc etc. To some extent I am capable of estimating the value of my own contributions for myself, but I am glad if you have found anything I have written useful. I tend to get a little lazy and go straight for the source reference, rather than going for the more wikipedia-friendly system of writing immensely long references beginning with the most recent and working back to the source, (e.g. J. Bloggs, 'Why I love John Killigrew', The Beano, no. 15,000, p. 7; citing A. Collins, Baronage of England, 100 vols (1680-1750), XCI, at pp. 731-2; citing Acts of the Privy Council, November 1591 (read in J.R. Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council of England vol xxxxviii (Eyre and Spottiswoode 1899), at pp. 72-75)), to invent an imaginary example - which is the ridiculous expedient towards which the Wikipedia guidelines can propel us if we interpret them as ironclad rules. We, that is, you and I, have both been editing here long enough to know better than that: we don't demand such standards from the millions of articles on modern trivia which cite newspaper reports as if they were always entirely true, even though we know that the daily press prints all sorts of garbage. However, in deference to your concerns, I don't currently intend to do any more work on Sir John Killigrew. Unfortunately he has been so skewed by modern fictional sources that it will only be by reference to authentic and scholarly materials, whatever their age, that a proportionate and contextualized account of him can be presented. Kind regards, Eebahgum (talk) 00:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

December greetings

December: story · music · places

Today, I have a special story to tell, of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. - I wish you a good festive season and a peaceful New Year! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Well into the new year, it's 12 years that you were found precious, remember? - I was on exciting vacation, see places if you are not afraid of peaks ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:46, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rossini's Petite messe solennelle was premiered on 14 March 1864, - when I listen to the desolate Agnus Dei I think of Vami_IV. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen to music from Ukraine if you like, - I heard it in 2022, and the November concert (at a different church) raised a truckload of winter clothes. My story today is also from my life: I heard the singer in 3 of the 4 mentioned musical items. I sang in yesterday's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

more music and flowers on Rossini's rare birthday --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

in memory of the birthday of a friend who showed me art such as this --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

vacation pics uploaded, at least the first day, - and Aribert Reimann remembered. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

some days later, a calf in the mist and chocolate cake, and a story of collaboration --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say how much I love your username: I was reminded of it whilst leaving a note for Gerda.

I take it you know the John Sentamu story about this? It may be apocryphal but is lovely anyway ... cheers DBaK (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]