User talk:Aklein62

{{NoACEMM}}

Your submission at AfC Joseph O'Kelly was accepted

Joseph O'Kelly, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please add image to Joseph O'Kelly

Greetings, since O'Kelly died so long ago, any images of him made during his lifetime (or shortly after) should be out of copyright. If you can find such an image of him, please upload it for the article; see WP:Images if you'd like to see how to do this. Nice work on your contribution! MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no known image of this composer, unfortunately. Aklein62 (talk) 12:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

George Osborne

Thanks for expanding the George Osborne (composer) article. However some of the extra information is outside the scope of the DIB article already cited. So could you add your new sources to the article with appropriate citations? Also, you have amended the date of death without referencing an alternative and better source. The DIB says 17 November but of course it is not infallible. Jim Bruce (talk) 08:31, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name disambiguation pages, like John Buckley

Please do not change the alphabetical order of entries to chronological order. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy and WP:MOSDAB. The logical reason for this is that many times the birth years are unknown, which then makes entries unsortable. On the other side, all entries have a name so they can always be sorted alphabetically. Kraxler (talk) 16:35, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any logic in this, sorry. Firstly, in a name disambiguation page, the names are necessarily the same and can't be properly sorted aplphabetically. If one does, you do it in those cases where there is a second forename. In the 'John Buckley' case, to which you refer, there was, for instance, a 'John Buckley (historian)', who is much better known as 'John D. Buckley', but the 'D' in this case is not part of the article name, which it should. However, all articles had birthdates, so the chronological order is very evident. Even in those rather scarce cases where a birthdate is not known, one knows at least the period (middle ages, or so). Aklein62 (talk) 06:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing wrong with stating your opinion. However, here on Wikipedia, we are supposed to follow the guidelines which I linked above. On a vast majority of name disanmbiguation pages, there are entries without birthdates, for a variety of reasons. So, the alphabetical order makes sense to me, but I can't discuss logic. One either understands it, or one doesn't. The entries with the same name are sorted by the disambiguator in parentheses. The name of the article on the historian depends on how he is known to the public (see WP:COMMONNAME), if he was known as John D. Buckley, the article could be moved to this name. But the only source given in the article (his university staff profile) refers to him as simply "John Buckley". As long as the article is named John Buckley (historian)|, it must be sorted as such. I'd prefer you read the pertaining guidelines before continuing this debate. Kraxler (talk) 18:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

Hello, I've undone your date format change at Marcel Tournier per the relevant guideline; he's not from an English-speaking country, so his article can either use the American or European date format. Graham87 16:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I will not argue with you about this. In my opinion, as Tournier wasn't American, the American date format should not be used. It just looks strange. But I will leave it at that.Aklein62 (talk) 18:48, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Swan Hennessy

Hello Aklein62, Thank you for your contributions to the Swan Hennessy page. Please feel free to improve the list of compositions there. I set that as a table because there is quite a lot of unknown information, and the composition titles can be quickly rearranged alphabetically. Hrdinský ^〒 19:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hrdinský, I finally did what we discussed in January. Because the list was so long I thought it would make sense to start a new article List of compositions by Swan Hennessy, where you now find your long table. In that same article I will also provide a list by genre (not yet completed as of today, but soon). For your table I have a number of additions regarding publishing details and will include all that in due course, when I find the time. For the actual article on Swan Hennessy, I will make a shorter list of 'Selected works'.Aklein62 (talk) 10:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Aklein62, I found the information for those titles on the internet. Unfortunately, I didn't save the source information. On searching again, I found two of the three (Twilight Meditation and Ocean March) in the Library of Congress, both composed by D. B. Hennessy and published 1879 by White, Smith & Co., Boston. No results were found for Fancy Ball. Thus, it's fair to say that the three titles should be removed. Thank you for your work! Hrdinský ^〒 14:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article format

Hi. ELs go last. The order at the end of articles should go footnotes (reflist), then book sources, then ELs. Also, the MOS allows the footnotes and sources to be named variously Notes, Sources, References, etc., so please do not change it, if other editors have already named these sections, without first going to the Talk page to seek a consensus to do so. Best regards -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

British/Irish

Sorry about that - I never looked because it would never have occurred to me, honestly, that "Irish" would be a subset of "British" in the category tree in the first place. So they got vacuumed up when I was doing something else.

Nothing else to worry about from me there - I don't foresee it happening again. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^Che dicono a Signa?_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Persondata

Thanks for the link. When you remove persondata, you should state in the editsummary that it is now deprecated (with a link?) so that people can understand what you are doing. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:15, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Male classical composers

I've been trying to go incrementally, so that anybody classed as a "male composer" and a "classical composer" could be moved over into a "male classical" category, for more precision. However, both the "male composer" and "male classical composer" categories are non-diffusing, which means I've been trying to ensure that the male composers remain in the proper male-composer-by-nationality categories. This has required a lot of retransfering between categories; I don't think I removed anything which I had added, but I may have done so inadvertently.

I did move some composers out of "male classical" and back into "male" because I think an argument can be made that medieval composers are pre-classical, and I would rather err on the side of caution. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^Che dicono a Signa?_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 07:59, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help at List of composers for the classical guitar

Hello, AKlein. Thanks for your help with adding nationalities. However, I have been deliberately leaving the nationality field blank for any composer who has "dual" nationality. I've been doing this because a dual listing will confound sorting the table by nationality. What's needed here is some explicit determination of which nationality is primary, after which the other(s) can be noted in the "Remarks" column. After I finish the merging, I intend to post a report on the Talk page of that article, in which I'll note the various items that will need the attention of editors. This issue is going to be one of those items. In the meantime, I'll be blanking those few "dual" nationalities in anticipation of the broader discussion that will take place. Thanks again for your help on this. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cohan description

Hi User:Aklein62, would you be able to add an origin and background on the Cohan surname article please? I've found a couple of sources ([1], [2]) for origin and distribution, but I can't paraphrase it correctly for Wikipedia. The current description is completely unsourced and claims it's unrelated to the Jewish name Cohen. --Theo (contribs) 12:53, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Theo Mandela, I am no expert in the origin of names, but it appears to me that the Cohan surname article is absolutely right, and so is your source no. 1. The Irish name Cohan has a totally different national and etymological background than Cohen, it seems to me, although they sound so similar. –– Aklein62 (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aklein62, well at the moment the article is entirely unsourced (which goes against WP:V), the Hanks source supports the Irish origin given but also supports the name being a variant of Cohen; "variant of Irish Cohane, an Anglicized form of Gaelic Ó Cadhain (see COYNE 2). Variant of spelling Jewish (Ashkenazic) COHEN. This spelling of the Jewish name is found mainly in France." Which would explain the second source showing an abundance of the name in France, although I don't know why the name is most common in India. The actress Lauren Cohan also adopted the name from her Jewish stepfather ([3]).

The reason I asked is because I saw an article you edited which was phrased very well, so if you added the description it wouldn't be in violation of WP:COPYPASTE. --Theo (contribs) 16:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Volans

Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information - this is particularly important about living pepople. Please feel to re-add the material, but only if supported by a reliable source. GiantSnowman 14:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong answer, GiantSnowman. I told you the source is the subject of the article himself, and that there is no correct external source available to refer to. So what can you do in such a case? I can restore, with a lot of time to invest, what you "edited" (i.e. damaged), but what if I add: "source: the composer". You would not like that either. You also did not respond to my request not to do such damaging edits before first collecting opinions via a Talk page. While I understand that WP relies on reliable sources, there is something fundamentally wrong with your approach. –– Aklein62 (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong answer - if we cannot independently verify the information, it should not be included. I have no need to discuss edits on the talk page, that is a basic tenet of WP:BLP and WP:BOLD. GiantSnowman 15:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All very unconstructive, good man. You can't just hide behind formalities. What you say doesn't answer the ultimate question, especially re "living people", what those living people shall do when they find faults on their own WP page and there is no external source to refer to when they want to make a correction. Mind you, external sources can be very wrong. What you are saying is that WP would rather publish a faulty externally sourced information than a correct version from the actual object of the article. In other words, potential fake prevails over truth. WP may have many rules (which is good in principle), but too little commonsense, it seems. Ah, and wait, there is a rule for Talk pages as well ... or was it commonsense? –– Aklein62 (talk) 15:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:VNT. Also, if there aren't any sources about this person, how do they pass WP:GNG? Are they even notable for an article here? GiantSnowman 08:12, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Georges Pfeiffer

Hello, Aklein62,

Thank you for creating Georges Pfeiffer.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thanks for creating this article

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Abishe}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Abishe (talk) 01:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dublin Orchestral Society

Hi - I'm Girth Summit, a new page reviewer, and I was taking a look just now at Dublin Orchestral Society, which you've been working on. There are a couple of issues that are making it a bit of a tricky review - rather than stick a tag on it though, I thought I'd drop you a personal note and see if we can work to improve the article (which is really interesting!).

• Sources - you're using Shields (2013) and Dribble (2010) a lot in the article - but you haven't explained what these are anywhere - publisher, title, ISBN, etc. There are a few different referencing styles that can be used here - see WP:CITE for more on that - but often I find the easiest thing is to use the tools above the editing window. If you click on 'Cite', you will see a 'Templates' menu, and if you click on that, you can choose 'Cite Book' and just fill in the relevant fields. That makes it much easier for someone to verify the information.
• Quotation - in the first paragraph of the History section, you have what appears to be a quotation - but it isn't attributed. It's sourced, but the source is offline, so I can't check it. Quotations need to be attributed, and there needs to be a reason why we are using a direct quotation rather than paraphrasing them. This looks like a simple assertion about the reasons for the orchestra being formed - why not simply say something like "Esposito, encouraged by the success of a season of concerts by the visiting Hallé Orchestra between 1897 and 1898, decided to establish a permanent resident orchestra in Dublin" - and then reference it to the same source?

Hope that makes sense. I'd be happy to help you develop this article from a technical perspective - you presumably have the subject knowledge and access to the sources, so if I can help you out with formatting and so on, please let me know. Cheers! GirthSummit _(blether) 20:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum - I see that another reviewer has accepted it already; I also see that your account has >4,000 edits, so apologies if I came across there as treating you like a newb! Still, I think the points above stand - and I'd be happy to work with you to improve it, if you're interested. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 20:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Girth Summit, many thanks for your constructive comments, much appreciated! Yes, admittedly, I don't really use the format under WP:CITE, preferring the "classical" academic style of citations. I see, though, that the process has advantages, such as the incorporation of ISBN numbers. Publishers and titles of the sources you mention were included, though, in their first citing. Perhaps I should get used to using WP:CITE after all ... – Aklein62 (talk) 11:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aklein62, I see what you mean about the first mention - it does make it easier to have stuff like isbn in there too. I find the cite tool generally easiest to use, but if you want a more academic style of citation, the Harvard format is quite commonly used. Take a look at Margaret Macpherson Grant for an example of how to set that out. GirthSummit _(blether) 13:45, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fritz Brase

I've been working on such as article for some time now User:Ww2censor/Fritz Brase and see several of your statements are unsourced. That's the reason I did not put mine online yet as I did not think it sufficiently well sourced and rather incomplete. I actually knew his wife and daughter and visited their house in Sandymount with my grand mother who was a good friend. Perhaps we can integrate the two works. ww2censor (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ww2censor, how interesting!! We were in touch about Brase some four years ago. Well, absolutely, if you would not mind me using your material I could try to make the best of both worlds. Would you agree? It may take a few days, perhaps until the weekend, for me to return to it as I have to go on two days business travel now. – Aklein62 (talk) 18:33, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which relation did you meet? Mona died in 2014, so it cannot have been her. To my knowledge there were no other living children. Let me give your article a good read over before I agree. It might be better if I add my prose your rather than visa versa. I'll get back to you. ww2censor (talk) 18:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not meet any relations of Brase. I meant that you and me were in touch about a potential Brase article about four years ago. – Yes, please do as you suggest, no problem. – Aklein62 (talk) 19:06, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Ll. Harrison

Hi. Thanks for creating Frank Harrison's article. You might find this source useful in expanding it: "Francis Llewellyn Harrison, 1905–1987", Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. 75 (1989), pp. 361–380. Many of the Fellows of the British Academy have obituaries available freely online; I've tried to link them here. Cheers, —Noswall59 (talk) 11:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Noswall59, many thanks for this. Yes, this is an excellent source. I first wanted to have a basic article out there, since Harrison was so deserving of this article. Quite astonishing that he did not have one yet. I have more in the pipeline about other Irish musicologists, but will make sure to return to it soon. Thanks for alerting me to the online source. – Aklein62 (talk) 12:53, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aloys Fleischmann

The article starts "Fleischmann was born in Munich". So he is not "Irish of German descent". He is an immigrant to Ireland. Rathfelder (talk) 15:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rathfelder, no, it's not that simple. You can be an Irish citizen and yet be born in Germany. Fleischmann's parents lived in Cork since 1906, four years before their son's birth. His mother was a concert pianist, and – believe it or not - he was born during a concert tour. His parents were immigrants to Ireland, so you can use that WP category in the entry for his father, Aloys Fleischmann (Senior), but not for Aloys junior. – Aklein62 (talk) 15:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Immigration and citizenship are not the same. But why not just removed Munich from the categories? He clearly didnt live there. Rathfelder (talk) 15:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know. And, of course, in 1910 there wasn't even an Irish citizenship. Fleischmann junior was as Irish as anyone who was born in or moved to Ireland before Irish independence. And once an Irish citizenship was available, Fleischmann got it. Yes, you can remove the category "People from Munich", he was rather from Cork. – Aklein62 (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

fr:Eugène Demets

Your article has finally appeared on the fr. Wiki. Someone is finalising the details. Good job!

Next will come soon. The Parisian cafés have reopened. LouisAlain (talk) 12:00, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, many thanks, how kind of you! I see there are already some 30 changes within a few hours, fantastic. Much appreciated. I saw that a number of the articles I proposed to you for translation into French already have an article now, like Louis Vuillemin, for example. By the way, I recently wrote another one on a once-popular French composer, see Georges Lamothe. – Aklein62 (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have forgotten many specifics of the fr Wiki such as the link to the date of birth and date of death as well as categories indicating the place of death and the age at the death. Portals are absolutely mandatory there whereas here noboby seems to care a fig about them. The fr. Wiki is also far less demanding regarding the online references than the en one. I suspect "Sidonie61" to articially raise her number of edits by intervening multiple times where on or two passages would have made it. Anyway, the article has its French version. Yours, LouisAlain (talk) 16:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

fr:Alice Sauvrezis

Next should be Max Eschig but wait some times now. Kudos for your work on her anyway. LouisAlain (talk) 15:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Barbara L. Kelly

Hello! Your submission of Barbara L. Kelly at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, are you coming back to resolve the issues in this nomination, or should it be marked for closure as unsuccessful? Yoninah (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yoninah. No, I won't. Feel free to mark it as unsuccessful. – Aklein62 (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it. Can't we show her work on DYK, and add the youth afterwards, when cn tags don't matter? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda, I was at first positively surprised when you nominated this article for a DYK notice. But the way this has now developed deeply troubles me. It is really not possible (and is never practiced anywhere on WP) to source absolutely every fact in a biography (or other thematic article for that matter). There is a limit to what makes sense. In the light of this discussion I would rather close the case of a DYK nomination here. There probably won't come a time "when cn tags don't matter" unless I write to Prof. Kelly and ask her to put this information on her personal website. But that would be absurd, wouldn't it? Let's just leave it as it is, please. Thanks for your initiative anyway. – Aklein62 (talk) 20:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to have caused you deep trouble. Personal website wouldn't even help because it's not independent. - We have the pseudo-sacred Main page, and for that, everything must be referenced, whether DYK or ITN (In the news), and afterwards, it would not matter, but up to you. I am in the process of another musicologist for ITN, Hella Brock. It's about her, not me, not you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Date formats

Hi Axel, thanks very much for your copyedits on classical music articles, but please do not change date formats in articles about people from non-English-speaking countries from American to European. The guidance in the relevant part of the Manual of Style says that date formats should only be changed if there is consensus on the talk page or strong ties to an *English*-speaking country that uses a different date format (so articles about people from Continental Europe can use either American or European date format, depending on how they were created). I have gone through all the pages you edited in the last week and adjusted them accordingly; I've left Friedrich Hieronymus Truhn's page alone though because the first author used both date formats. Graham87 07:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Graham, that must have been a lot of work for you, sorry. Well, the rules are the rules, aren't they? I wished we could deal with those rules in a more flexible manner, and I am sure we could. If an American user creates an article, s/he would apply the American date format out of sheer habit and for no other reason. However, it should be the subject of the article that counts, not the user who creates the article (in the end, it is the article that survives when the user may be long gone). I would never change the date format for an article on an American musician, but it sure looks strange for one on a German or French musician. Therefore I wished you would let me continue doing my edits in this manner, done in a spirit of improving Wikpedia. – Aklein62 (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it was ... but sorry, your opinion on whether an article looks strange or not with a certain date format doesn't count. English isn't an official language in Germany or in France so the date format used in articles about those countries can be either dmy or mdy (as set by the first contributor), and there are usually no national ties to English-speaking countries. The rules are set to *minimise* the number of date format changes an article has to go through and to provide clear guidelines about them if they need to occur. Feel free to ask more questions about the guideline at its talk page. Graham87 16:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Finn Varra Maa has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Finn Varra Maa. Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Finn Varra Maa has been accepted

Finn Varra Maa, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

gobonobo ^+ ^c 19:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Carlo Michele Alessio Sola

Hi. I am trying to reach Aklein62. Please can you provide me with the source of your information for the birth date of Carlo M A Sola (as above). I am trying to track down family history ad have come to a grinding halt, so any info you could give me would be appreciated (I am based in the UK and not familiar with the 'behind the scenes' of Wikipedia). Thank you. Jan. [e-mail] 2A00:23C6:1729:9401:506E:E7E:880:B4AB (talk) 08:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seoirse Ó Dochartaigh has been accepted

Seoirse Ó Dochartaigh, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Onel5969 ^TT me 02:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]