User talk:Wspencer11

I see you've been here several days and no-one's welcomed you yet. Allow me… Welcome!

Hello, Wspencer11, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

I'm always glad to see new Wikipedians editing in the classical music sections. I particularly agree with your comment about the content of the article about Vaughan Williams' 6th. Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 09:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Wspencer! Let me add my own welcome, since I see you've already met Robert: I'm also quite happy to see another person editing in the "classical" music area. If you enjoy English music, there's plenty more that needs to be written in that area! Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and another greeting... great to see another classical musician and another bassoonist as well! (I have, alas, done precious little classical music writing lately... one of these days I will give bassoon another push, really.) Nice work so far, and looking forward to your further contributions! Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am fooling with creating a new userbox. I have a basic idea of how I want it to look, and I have a generic photo for the ID but am not certain how to proceed. Thanks in advance!

Have you read

talk

) _{14:41, 15 August 2006}

Yes I have. I don't know how to define the colors, for example...is there a list of the codes used and their equivalent colors? And how do I upload the picture I have?

I find there is a useful list of colours and their codes here. Your image can be uploaded using

talk

) _{15:07, 15 August 2006}

Thanks! Here's what I have come up with so far.

How do I get the picture to fit the space (i.e. not have any white margin the way it shows now), and how do I get the link in the info space to show up as white also? Thanks again!

How's this? — 

Yes! I don't know how you did it but that's exactly right. (Now I just have to figure out how to submit this for others to use, but that's not a pressing problem right now.) Thank you so much!

No problem! — 

talk

) _{16:28, 15 August 2006}

Hi Wspencer: I realize I never answered you about your career-changing question back in July. (Your note on the Hindemith talk page reminded me.) That's not an easy thing to pull off, either way, but if you have comfortable employment in IT, hey, it pays the bills (and probably better than much in our doctoral fields!) I find I rarely regret my decision to make a living in the high-tech sector, and Wikipedia is a great outlet for my need to ramble on and on about musical things. You just have to make an extra effort to keep your musical chops, be they conducting, performing, score-reading, or others. Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, hello from a fellow M.  :-) Antandrus (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been a member since I was in grad school, but haven't gone for a few years: now mainly I read the bulletin, but I keep my eye out for interesting events. The most fun for me was the games nights where we played Scrabble and other things, but also the weekly happy hours, and monthly gatherings where there were speakers, were quite a lot of fun: I always had a good time, talked to a lot of people, and got home late. The one negative is that there are a lot of big, bloated egos in the organization (duh ... and for all I know, maybe other people thought I was one), and therefore a lot of loud hot-air dispensers. But overall I enjoy the events, and keep paying my annual dues. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 15:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, I too love Whitman. The authentic American voice, and so inspiring. I think my favorite is still Lilacs, maybe the finest elegy in the English language ... and that Hindemith setting is pretty good. Antandrus (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've only heard it once, but it was one of those car-radio experiences where I was driving, heard this extremely moving piece, (in German, and my German is not good enough to decipher choral singing), and had to know who wrote it and what the heck it was, because it grabbed me; so I just sat in a parking area until it was over. When I found out what it was, I was amazed that someone had translated Lilacs into German, and that Hindemith had set it: and being right after the war, it seemed right that his feelings of loss must have paralleled Whitman's, approximately (no correlate to Lincoln, but to the devastation of the war generally, rather like Strauss's magnificent Metamorphosen of the year before). I need to hear it again to see if it would strike me the same way. Antandrus (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never responded to your career-change question either, did I? While music is a consuming hobby, I think my decision not to pursue music as a career was purely economic (helped by the fact that I realised I'm no second Brendel). I find that I have enough outlets for my musical talents to avoid feeling I've "wasted" my musical training, and am quite content that I am still able to hold my own in musical discussions with the really notable musicians I know. I am also often struck by the similarity in outlook required to write or perform music and to solve difficult software problems! It's something to do with collaboration, alertness, holding tenaciously to principles acquired through experience, and trying "during performance" immediately and imaginatively to grasp every tiny opportunity. Anyway, enough of my twaddle… Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 13:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was an act of kindness to leave one! I dropped by his/her page to say thanks, but didn't go overboard! I have received a couple of them that I was so pleased with I have polished them up and put them on my user page! And s/he was right: you do deserve one! --RobertG ♬ talk 17:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I am! I did some minor formatting edits to them; nice to see. There aren't enough articles on classical performers in Wikipedia... seems like the pop stars get all the attention! (But then, they get all the controversy and edit-warring, too...) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, that's something that is much needed around here, and I'm almost tempted to post an invitation on the Administrator's Noticeboard for everyone not signed up to go and join, considering the diminishing civility I see around Wikipedia ... but to join, simply add your name to the list at Wikipedia:Kindness_Campaign, and put the userbox on your page if you like. I think it's an excellent idea and I'm glad you reminded me I'm a member; I'd forgotten. :-) Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there in NH. Either there's a missing word, or for some other reason your post left me bewildered, but it's still good to communicate via this thing. I stumbled upon WP doing some random googling last year, and find it the funnest and easiest way to get info fast ... as long as the positioning of a major weight-bearing beam doesn't depend upon its accuracy. I can't recall if it was me or Ezra or who started the SI page, but it's fairly accurate, and only occasionally irreverent and non-encyclopedia-like. Sfahey 21:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many happy returns to you too! It's the

Oh, yes, there are POV issues with that article. It reminds me of the way many "classical music" articles were when I first joined the project. This appears to be where the POV came in [1]. That part should probably be toned down or excised, though an appropriately cited section of a quoted POV by a published writer might be all right (it certainly is true, as far as I remember, that he helped popularize pipe organ music here in the U.S.). Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 15:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you did anything wrong; the revert appears to have been an error. I changed it back. It might be good to cite sources (e.g. his book; I have it at home, and can add it to a references section if you don't get to it first). Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 15:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antandrus was the name of an ancient city on the coast of Asia Minor, populated by Greeks. It's mentioned by Xenophon, Thucydides, and a few other ancient writers. Has a personal significance ... :) Antandrus (talk) 16:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For many contributions with limited reward, I present you with this Original Barnstar. Sharkface217 01:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a strange one indeed. It makes no sense at all; it appears to be a vandal/troublemaker. If he/she/it does it again I'll do what's necessary ... it's on my watchlist now. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings again; that's an odd one indeed. My first guess is that it is a machine translation, perhaps from French.

"One can also borrow a narrow and difficult track leading to the road of Beni Mellal while descending the gorges from the "wadi el-Abid" by a canyon sometimes which one does not distinguish the bottom with nearly 600 meters."

Perhaps means:

One can also follow a narrow and difficult path leading to the road of Beni Mellal while descending into the gorges from the "wadi el-Abid" by a canyon route, from which you can sometimes see the bottom of the canyon up to 600 meters below.

But I'm not sure. Maybe put it on the talk page?

Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 16:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just saw this light up as a new article; thanks!! (This piece has my vote as the most hauntingly beautiful and eloquent composition of the late 15th century ... it's incredible.) I look forward to the day when Wikipedia has as many articles on Renaissance compositions as on top-40 songs. Cheers ... :) Antandrus (talk) 17:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link! It was a good writeup, and I love Paul O'Dette's playing. Not all of those composer articles are well-developed yet; for the most part I haven't written much about the instrumental composers (well, I did write the Vincenzo Capirola article ... and Claudin de Sermisy was mainly a chanson composer). Sure is a lot of work to be done here still. Oh, and for the edit counter, you can use [2], which is the only one I know that currently works (though I get an error on my own edit count--"too many page fetches" -- so it won't go past about 45,000). Have a great Thanksgiving! Antandrus (talk) 17:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just realised I never replied to your message on my talk: you have email. --RobertG ♬ talk 11:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was not trying to put more advertising sludge in the article but to put something in the lead that shows how this company relates to other companies in the field and to the industry of pottery/porcelain in England. I think it is a great article and does not sound like advertising at all. I would say to remove the advertising tag. --Tinned Elk 19:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}

Hello. You have used the {{

I have found an article that I think needs cleanup/rewriting, but although I know I have seen articles tagged for that I can't find where to get the tag to add to "my" article. A bad sentence but you know what I mean. Where can I find the tag? Thanks! --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 14:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, here is the list of all cleanup templates:

Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. Hope that helps! Happy editing, I remove the helpme tag. If you have further inquiries, don't hesitate to put it back! -- lucasbfr ^talk 21:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

It was a copyright violation from here so I speedy deleted it. He can rewrite it in his own words if he wants. We can't tolerate copyvios even for a minute: too risky.

Have fun with the singing! Wish I could be there (I'm no singer, alas ...) Antandrus (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions welcome on how to improve the William Byrd bio page. It began life as little more than program notes but does seem to deserve better. Who wants to buy expensive and bloated scholarly monographs just to get the basic up-to-date facts about a composer's life?

I'm happier in any case singing/conducting Byrd than churning out prose about him!

Kerry

Hello, just wanted to let you know that I had made some changes to the Pittsburgh Symphony article. Let me know what you think. Thanks, ~~ 2:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC), DJRafe

And merry Christmas to you too! Were you perhaps thinking of the Chantilly manuscript, e.g. the piece by Baude Cordier? I'm not at home right now so I don't have my library within arm's reach, but Belle, bonne, sage is in the shape of a heart. Happy new year as well! Antandrus (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't help seeing your question when I was writing to Antandrus. You may also be thinking of the Chansonnier Cordiforme [3], a collection of late XV century songs from Savoy (just next door to me!). Cheers Nick Michael 21:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. Hope you saw the discussion re: your suggestion of adding a bit of trivia to the Vermont article. As I mention there, if placed in the proper context, and including citation, it could be a good add. Check out the chatter and see what you think.

Cheers--Jonashart 21:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I fixed it this way [4] -- if there is yet another use for the word "Muti", then we would need to make a redirect page, using a notice like this {{redirect|Muti}} at the top of the Muti article. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 17:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! It's the magic of the admin "rollback" button. Here you go: Help:Reverting#Rollback There are some non-admin ways to do it that involve customizing your .js files, as well as some other automated methods: a lot of people are using these things. (I used to use "rv" before becoming an admin.) Basically any time I pull up a diff, a history, or a contributions list, there is a rollback button available on any topmost edit so I can hit it pronto if it is vandalism. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 02:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings again; it looks like a semi-respectable stub, now that the promotional copyvio has been deleted. I removed a

Regarding linking all the faculty: I think there are differing opinions about this. Some are certainly notable enough for Wikipedia articles (and likely the "inclusionist" club may consider them all to be). I like redlinks in general because they tempt new people to become Wikipedians, by giving them a little carrot ("hey, I can write an article about this person!") Some people remove redlinks to people that are unlikely to pass the notability standard; you could do that if you want. Regarding links to an external site--I'm not crazy about this, but as a substitute for a redlink it seems justifiable. I never use external linking that way myself though. Hope this helps! Antandrus (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! I love that comment! Speaking of which, see the thread that just started at the bottom of my talk page a few minutes ago ... argh ... what do we do about

these kinds of contributors ... Antandrus (talk) 18:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Hey, he was a nice enough guy and a great composer, but ... wasn't he a Protestant? LOL... [5] Antandrus (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I should have started a new thread. My comment on Schütz has nothing to do with the above; I just thought it was funny that someone or something considers him a "saint". All of those topics are unrelated: the "unwarranted deletions" is about a conflict of interest (a composer's husband has been over-promoting her throughout Wikipedia, and I'm exasperated); the Peabody stuff you had asked me about; and I mentioned Schütz to you because you had edited the article previously. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 16:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes ... thanks ... I'm starting to lose my cool. You can post at the

conflict of interest noticeboard and no one notices or cares. Sometimes it feels so lonely doing this administrative crud. I should go hike in the mountains instead of hanging around Wikipedia today; it's a lovely day. "What, art thou upset with other men's badness? is it your badness? Teach them then, or bear with them." --Marcus Aurelius. Oh well. Antandrus (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Greetings! The easiest way I know is to find another person in roughly the same category (I grabbed Gustav Mahler at random), and click on the national cat (Category:Austrian conductors). Then you see the supercategory it is in (Category:Conductors by nationality) and can click on it. Since I don't see options for German-American or German-born-American, probably the best choice is American conductors. I put it in. You can see if he fits in more cats by looking at other similar people and seeing what categories they are in--you can get lots of ideas that way. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 03:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How curious that we should both be attempting to correct "Sinfonia Antartica" at the same moment! Myopic Bookworm 15:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't rate "Antartica" among the best, but I'm not wholly convinced by Nos. 8 and 9. Myopic Bookworm 15:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please state your question, then replace the {{

Thanks. I am trying to get three columns of userboxes on my user page but the right-hand one is not aligned with the others. Is there a cure for that? Thanks!

At 800x600, the screen can only fit two columns. A horizontal scroll bar would be kind of ugly. Xiner (talk, email) 16:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at 1440 x 900 and it's still a problem, unfortunately. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 16:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest using a Table, 3 boxes wide and placing the userboxes in each box exit2dos2000 18:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is still chaos, I'm afraid. I tried following the directions there and got...well, it was a mess. Here's more or less what I would like: [example]. I know I'm in over my head and am hoping someone can get me through this without too too much trouble. Thanks! --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 16:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wspencer! Can't help much with userbox code, I'm afraid; it's an area I pretty much avoid. I'd suggest looking around at some of the user pages that are rich with boxen and seeing how they do it. Good luck! Antandrus (talk) 21:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not that experienced either but have you read through Help:Table? There's a table about a third of the way down with the letters of the alphabet in three columns. That looks like it might be what you're looking for. Good luck! MarkBuckles (talk) 05:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed your message on the article's talk page - thanks for pointing that out! I posted the scan of the first page of the score as the main image. What do you think? MarkBuckles (talk) 23:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely George Szell, not György Széll, though you can list that in parens. Typically in these cases I have a look at the New Grove article, which gives the usage; in his case they do not even give alternate versions of the name. Possibly Gyorgy was his birth name and on becoming a U.S. citizen he changed it formally to George. He's George Szell in every reference book and recording. Btw, "gyorgy szell" is at least one other person on Google, so the results on that name are misleading. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 15:08, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the talk page for my comments on the correct name of the piece

Okay, page renamed, links corrected, RVW article updated. JackME 22:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are up for deletion...

Hi Wspencer! I think it's correct to leave the key out. As far as I know Shostakovich did not include it for either, and in ambiguous cases we should not try to guess. I don't have a score for either right in front of me ... if memory serves, 14 begins in G minor but isn't really in G minor. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's no use for just only us two to argue the mood of the second movement. Can you find more Wikipedian to discuss it?(Addaick 06:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I see you didn't edit something on Symphony No.5 these few days. First, I don't know who is so good editing many things on the first movement but just a little in second movement. This is the major problem faced by us. Lack of information about the second movement in the article means that our dicussion is not work and I certainly don't get any informations from CD booklet but from the track. Hope you can contact me. Thanks.(Addaick 13:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Me again. I am very welcome to know more about your idea of the Symphony No.5 (Sibelius). This is certainly not a problem of us having a big different opinion. Please don't mind that we have conflict in there before. We just want to get a better quality article, that's what we are striking for. Feel free!(Addaick 10:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I thought you might be interested in a WikiProject proposal I just created. I would like to start a project devoted to improving Wikipedia pages relating to modern art in various mediums. Many these articles are often simply too under staffed; a specific project focusing on this category of articles will go a long way towards bring them up to Wikipedia standard. I hope you can help! --S.dedalus 00:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The proposal is now called Experimental art. (To clarify that it focuses on all mediums.) --S.dedalus 03:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

/me scratches her head/ Hm, sweetie, I don't know - they seem to be displaying fine for me. Be aware that, in the last days, there have been several problems with images not appearing properly due to a problem at Commons, that I experienced myself, so it may be caused by that. But relax - as far as I can tell, all your userboxes are AOK :) Try clearing your cache and see it they display fine now, k? Love, Phaedriel - 21:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for expressing your interest in the proposed WikiProject Contemporary music

Consistency, consistency, consistency… Hello! Yes, it certainly should be moved. However, I wonder about the "(Vaughan Williams)" in the article titles. There is only one A Sea Symphony, and only one A London Symphony, just as there is only one Sinfonia antartica. There is also only one A Pastoral Symphony, and I could easily arrange disambiguation links at the top of it and at the top of Beethoven's 6th. If you agree, I will move all of them to get rid of the unnecessary "(Vaughan Williams)" disambiguation. Or do you think all the VW symphony article titles should have the composer disambiguation in them, whether necessary or not? Let me know and I'll do as you think best. --RobertG ♬ talk 12:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which discussion? -Ravedave 20:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved your inquiry to the Agee talk page where it can get the attention it requires. Thanks! --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 14:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I use umlauts al the time in coöperate, noöne, etc. in preference to a hypen, and have done so long before I ever read

--kylet 22:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your suggestion on the Talk page for Copland that he deserves a separate article listing all his works. Many (many) years ago, Boosey & Hawkes published a catalog of his compositions, but I wouldn't know where to find one now. How should such a page be arranged? Chronologically? By genres?

In any event, it shouldn't be impossible to assemble. I think there isn't that much left of Copland's that hasn't been recorded, so sorting out most of the necessary dry details shouldn't be difficult. A pity there isn't a comprehensive analysis on the order of Eric Walter White's book on Stravinsky's music.

Sources? The aaroncopland.com page isn't much. There's a good list at http://www.coplandhouse.org/info.asp?pk=239, which I think I'll add as a resource on the Wikipedia page. Any comments welcome. Signinstranger (talk) 18:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...indeed. It's good to see you back editing again -- as much as you like. The changes to software architect look good to me; thank you for removing "seeing the big picture" (every cliche deleted from Wikipedia improves us just a nudge). Yeah, the Bernstein Mass. When I was in graduate school it was fashionable to deride that piece. I like it; in particular I find the end very moving.

I'm not quite as active on Wikipedia as I used to be. I still check my watchlist every day to clean off vandalism, but I've noticed that it has become a lot harder to write and edit, and my list of new articles to build from scratch is getting shorter by the day. It seems that almost everything is written. In place of writers contributing new content there are armies of volunteers looking for troublemakers to revert and report, or articles to categorize, stamp and grade. It seems that articles are growing maintenance templates like a fungus: click random page a few times and see how many articles have a gigantic tag at the top, meaning more or less "this article is untrustworthy for the following reason." There aren't many of us left editing regularly in the art music area, but there are a few, and it remains one of the kinder, more civil areas on the project. -- So welcome back, it is good to see you. Antandrus (talk) 14:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reading your comments on this article and feel a similara quandary. As much as I'm willing to polish the writing, would that really be enough to improve the article considering the sources used in it? What else might need to be done? I'm open to suggestions. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 22:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got your note and, by the standards you set, I am not qualified myself to write about the piece. I am neither a highly-trained musician nor a trained scholar in classical music, just an amateur. Perhaps I should leave well enough alone. Jonyungk (talk) 07:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see your work on this article, which is excellent. As I mentioned earlier, my own ability to work on it in anything but a biographical or historical basis would be extremely limited, and I am just now finding out from reading Elizabeth Wilson's excellent book and working on Symphony No. 13 (Shostakovich) just how misleading Ian MacDonald's work can actually be. Apologies on not replying until now. Jonyungk (talk) 19:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your suggestion that the Engima should be separated from the Enigma Variation (Separate the puzzle from the music.) I am the chemical engineer who believes that Pi is the answer. I have written a paper, yet unpublished, which gives many reasons for believing Pi is the solution, but it is hardly mentioned in the Wiki article. I have not added info because it is not yet published. When published, the info will be added. 75.111.142.127 (talk) 00:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

If you're interested in the

When I thanked you for contacting me, I was appreciative, but had no idea I'd left the message above, until I thought of going to your talk page, so now I know. I'm having great fun with Wikipedia, but boy, do I get lost! Getting lost is great in some ways, for example, when you're just following cross references in an encyclopedia of science and technology, learning all sorts of amazing stuff, you'd never have thought of otherwise, but when somebody says, "Go read this webpage," and gives me a link, I usually don't. I'd make a lousy student, and did. Unfree (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wspencer11. You have new messages at Talk:Pines of Rome.
Message added 08:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

No, you're NOT just a lone voice etc etc! :) Best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've raised this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music#Classical work articles listing every usage and influence in the hope that it's an FAQ and there's a policy, or that someone there will offer guidance on a good way forward. DBaK (talk) 08:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & Meetup - Who should come? You should. Really.
	FINE ART EDIT-A-THON & DC MEETUP 26 is December 17! The Edit-a-Thon will cover fine art subjects from the SarahStierch (talk) 16:26, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply ]

Hi! Thanks for your many good-faith contributions. I wanted to let you know that I marked Magnificat (Vaughan Williams) for deletion, because I couldn't find anything on the Web to justify giving it its own page, per WP:Notability. I think it would be good material for the Ralph Vaughan Williams and Magnificat pages.

All right, sorry about that. I failed to

WP:AGF. What I should have said was: Do you think you could dig up a monograph, or at least liner or program notes, which would make good citations and prove notability?FourViolas (talk) 17:38, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

How about this? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vaughan Williams
Thank you, bassoonist and conductor who still enjoys singing and music, for professional contributions to articles on music, such as Ralph Vaughan Williams and his works, Sancta Civitas and Magnificat, for substantial discussions and gnomish corrections, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1025 of

Five years ago, you were recipient no. 1025 of Precious ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, Wspencer11. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]