User talk:GuillaumeTell/Archive 2

"Created the role of"

Thanks for your message. I am, however, perfectly well aware of the phrase and its usage. The point is that it's both misleading and ambiguous for many people who are unaware of it, and we should be aiming at lucidity and ease of understanding for such readers (including those whose first language isn't English). Given that "was the first person to play the role" is both perfectly clear and exactly equivalent (and avoid the subjective question as to any effect they might have had on subsequent performers), it's surely preferable. In other words, wherever possible we should use plain English rather than the jargon of a particular discipline or activity. I've had this discussion before, in fact; I haven't yet encountered an argument that has made me change my mind. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Links from main articles to other spaces (Talk space, Userspace, Wikipedia space) are discouraged on Wikipedia. I was actually going through a specially generated list of articles with links to userspace and cleaning them out. Often it's because an editor signs as article, sometimes it's because a user is mentioned, or add themselves to an article, and since there is no main space article about them, links it to their user page. I believe that that is what you did there. I'm not questioning whether or not you are actually the person mentioned -- I'm sure you are. It's just that until there is an article in the mainspace about you (subject to the same editing and formatting constraints of other articles, and preferably not created by or edited by you) then the link in that article will have to remain red, or be unlinked. Cheers. Dina 21:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zeller/Palmay; Kurt Gänzl

Thanks. You must be right about Zeller. In creating a bio for Ilka Palmay, I had a lot of translation problems. Take a look at it if you like.

Also, I just put up a starter article on Kurt Gänzl. Can you add anything to it? I hope you had a great new year. Best regards! -- Ssilvers 17:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I just found out that I'll be playing Sir Joseph in Pinafore at the Festival this summer on 8 August with SavoyNet and Sir Richard Cholmondeley in April in NY with www.BHT.org. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 21:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orfeo ed Euridice

I think this is nearly ready for GA - would you mind giving it the once-over? Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 20:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, maybe you could work some of that detail - what became what, what was added in 1774 - to the Synopsis section, or blend it in with the rest of the article? Thing is that I don't think a whole list of what correlates to what between 1762 and 1774 will really fly: mostly because it wouldn't be so interesting, and secondly because per Wikipedia:Embedded list I don't think it's allowed anyway. But a lot of that data can go into the Synopsis, which will easily stand bulking up. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 16:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
O.k, I'll accomodate that point of view per NPOV, though interestingly it's not my POV nor that of Grove, which I think makes it clear that although Gluck was committed to reform, he was a practical fellow and on occasion had to write arias and operas that contravened his principles in order to pay the rent. I won't include this next bit, because it's WP:OR, but look at what happened to Guadagni, who didn't sacrifice his principles on occasion: he wouldn't repeat arias and retired earlyish. But seeing as there is an alternative viewpoint, I'll work that in - there's an interesting quote from the librettist fellow on his importance. Someone with Viking might want to add some detail and cites if I can't cover this properly.Dealt with, pretty much. Moreschi Deletion! 11:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are there recordings with a baritone Orfeo? I knew it had been sung for a baritone, didn't know it had been recorded. If so, then yes, that should be mentioned at some place.
With the synopsis, I'd just say go ahead. The synopsis could certainly do with some more detail.
With the Performance history and Revisions thing, I'd say leave it for now. It's good enough for GA IMO and we've all got enough on our plates with another 200-odd annotations to add at that miserable list without making life more difficult for ourselves than is actually needed.
The problem is with the citing is that for some cites I give page numbers, but the Grove stuff is from the website, so I can't. The point is that abc citing precludes page numbers, but the abc citing can't be applied only to some and not to others. Same problem at the list, though there I will add author names to the Grove cites. Thanks for helping out. I'll leave Adam a note to see if there are any extra flaws that we've missed. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 17:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've nominated for GA, but the GAC is so frequently backlogged I reckon it'll be week at very best before someone gets to it, so we've got lots of times to carry out whatever revisions are necessary in the meantime. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 11:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look good! I made a few minor fixes, but it's great, so feel free to go ahead and do the next two acts. No need for the keys, I agree, though I'll put a note in to the effect that a lot of the key unity of 1762 went in 1774. And wow, that baritone recording is quite something, I listened to the amazon clips. Great singing, though the tempo is charmingly anachronistic is just quite how slow it is. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 18:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on my talk. Suggestion one with Dev's idea looks the best. See you round tomorrow. Cheers, Moreschi Request a recording? 22:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No porblem with that. Cheers, Moreschi Request a recording? 17:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opera discographies

Hello, I have also made a Pelléas et Mélisande discography. I could make discographies of other operas when I have more time. It is true that it would be good to add the labels. When a recording is available on several labels, maybe just one of them could be mentioned. I'll see what I can do.

Roope 19:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jenufa

Peter Dewar-Finch

Yeah, that one needed the delete button, so you were right to let me know. I think I sorted it out. Cheers. Dina 12:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JORVIK Viking Centre

See my comment at User talk:RHaworth#JORVIK Viking Centre. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 21:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Othello etc

Thanks for the heads up, I'll try to sort this mess out. You were completely right to revert: prod would be fairly pointless for that article, as he can and will just take the tag off. I'll take it to AFD. Cheers, Moreschi Want some help? Ask! 16:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of librettists

I think the Crozier/Forster is the best solution to the Auden problem (I was just about to add "Paul Bunyan"). It would be silly to credit Britten/Pears with the libretto for MND. I suppose it might be all right to put Shakespeare there. After all, I've put Apollinaire as a librettist for Poulenc although he was long dead by the time the opera was written. What about Buechner and "Wozzeck"? I'm also in two minds about adding librettists who were famous in their own right, such as Victor Hugo and Zola, even though the operas they wrote for have faded. Well, I'll leave you to it for tonight. I've done enough work here for today. It's looking good though. Cheers. --Folantin 21:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grove seems sounder, but I don't have it. I don't think Debussy can be said to be the librettist of P&M - all he did was cut a few minor scenes and lines. As for the MND problem, maybe we should just ignore it altogether! After all, not every opera is going to make the page. Cheers. --Folantin 07:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aida

GuillaumeTell , I am sorry for editing Aida to Aïda, I didn’t see the discussion in the discussion box. It can be confusing since many sites prefer to use Aïda. Anyway, when you changed the name, you also removed “noted arias” and a link to the “aria DB and the role” that I wrote before that. I have added them back and I have also changed “Aïda” to Aida in my other page (ms). - Jay 06:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the link :)) -Jay 11:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Il trittico

Let's see: they're not "balanced" simply because they're different... in fact, I believe Gianni Schicchi's extreme relative popularity unbalances the set; Il tabarro is not "full of the violence"... there is one murder at the very end; I think stating that Suor Angelica was Puccini's favourite necessitates a reference, esp. as he postponed its writing to work on Gianni; lastly, I, personally, would not characterize Suor Angelica as "up-lifting": she does kill herself in the end! Of course, most of these problems are simply disagreements in interpretation. However, if such pov statments (those dependent on your interpretation) are to be included, they must be cited, I think. -- Rmrfstar 02:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from Jay

Thanks for your kind words. If you think there are too many stubs (and “red” links) in Wiki En, I think it is not as difficult as the dilemma I am having right now. Opera and classical music are almost "alien" in my country and Asian countries - “Malay Language” speakers. Mostly people who know opera in here are those who studied abroad (US/Europe) but still, it can’t guarantee their interest. Most of my friends said, “Opera is for old people who like to hear bunch of fat men and old ladies screaming using kinky weird voices” – funny huh? Damn, I wish if I could kill them all. I am basically doing all the opera articles in Wikipedia ms by myself, and to be frank, I don’t know whether any of Malay language speakers bother to read because as I said, it is damn hard to find opera fans here. I had to import opera DVDs straight from The Met (damn they cost me BOMB!). I cannot even order from amazon.com since most opera DVD in amazon.com are in Region 1 format. Anyway, I got an idea to use Wiki En method to gain popularity (to encourage many writers) by setting up Wikiproject Opera in ms. I can’t really hope for big response, and if nobody showed up helping, it seems like I have to spend years to do all the terminologies, operas, composers etc. Anyway, if I could find some extra time, I will also contribute in Wiki Opera En, particularly in arias and libretti/librettists. - Jay 07:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cfd Romantic opera

Hi. In reply to your question: I think we have to let this one run its course. It's a software problem - we can't change categories in the way we change article titles. That's why I try to get a consensus on the Opera Project before putting up for a Cfd. Doing it 'in public' is more difficult. Regards.-- Kleinzach

M. Favart

I added a synopsis and a link to the libretto. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 12:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try this one: http://books.google.com/books?id=LmQNAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22madame+favart%22+offenbach

-- Ssilvers 17:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Le pont des soupirs; Blue Beard; Robinson Crusoé; La fille du tambour-major

I added some links and info to a few more of the Offenbach operettas that were blue linked, but some of my synopses are just summaries of what Boosey says and are little more than drivel. Can you look them over and see if you can improve them? Best regards, -- Ssilvers 03:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Wagner's "Parsifal"

It occurred to me after the fact that some of my comments regarding tagging of articles such as the one above might not have been as clear as I would like. On that basis, I have appended an additional comment to the end of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject King Arthur#Tristan und Isolde. It is my hope that something which might have been ambiguous before is now a bit clearer, and you are, of course, free to discuss any concerns you might have regarding this, or any other matter possibly relating to that project, on that page or directly with me on my talk page. Thank you for your indulgence. John Carter 13:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aage Haugland

Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 11:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats what I meant I was a bit vague!! Have you any idea if there is a Danish to english translation servic eon the internet that is free? because I want to put all the articles on actors and films from danish wikipedia into english ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 17:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THanks - oh I contribute in a massive range of subjects -from italian film and actors to Japanese physicians, hungarian sculptors, cuban writers, thai locations, slovakian villages, finnish essayists to Danish dermatogoists!!!!! E.g from Tiger hunting to Camel farming in Sudan, to Joymati to Shalu Monastery!!!! If you read my user page a bit further you'll seemore of my areas of work. There is so much to be done so little time!!! Imagine how this will look in ten years time!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 17:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and paste from 'Giuseppe Verdi Official Site'

Thanks for your note, the same user has wriiten an article on Re Lear. It was taken from here [1]. More later -- Kleinzach 00:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up, it seems all the text has come from the same source: the Giuseppe Verdi. 'Official Site'. I've put a note on the project page. It seems he/she has worked on about 20 operas, and all done today! The speed of his/her work is prodigious! I really don't want to spend all my time reverting the stuff. I hope someone can do it in some kind of automated way.

And while I am here . . .

I wonder if you would like to vote on Cfd here and on Templates for deletion/infoboxes here.

Also, regarding the Project page, I'm open to any suggestions about consolidating, revising and shortening the page, so long as the stuff we need to address problems with categories, spoilers, trivia etc (fairly predictable?) remain prominently on the main page. (As you will have seen I've been converting a few vertical lists into horizontal ones.) Best. -- Kleinzach 01:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More on Re Lear

I thought this was spurious and put it up for deletion after it was created by Nrswanson, but someone has 'rescued' it. Do you know the background? AFAIK Cammarano never wrote the libretto and Verdi never wrote any music. Am I right? -- Kleinzach 11:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That's terrific. My feeling is that having an article on the subject isn't viable. What do you think? Would it be a good idea to put your research up on the Re Lear talk page - or should I put it up for Afd deletion and then put the information there? What would be best? -- Kleinzach 23:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is certainly important and worthy of space. I just wonder whether it should be in Giuseppe Verdi rather than as a separate article as this will imply listing as one of his works (infobox et al) as done on the website our copypaster used. -- Kleinzach 00:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks I have put it up for deletion (this time Afd) and quoted you on the talk page. I'd be grateful if you could have a look at it. I just hope we aren't going to have a trail of people exclaiming "Oh, how wonderful another opera by Verdi! And it's Lear, how fascinating! We must keep this!". -- Kleinzach 09:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roles

Thanks , yes, you can add on the singers name, I dont have them. I'll change the bass links once I have done with the rest. - Jay 13:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Handel sub-categories

GT -- thanks for the note and taking care of the sub-categories. Wasn't aware of that policy but makes perfect sense! As for categorizing those hard-to-categorize works as oratorios or other, that's a project that requires some sensitive understanding of the specific pieces and so forth... I plan to address that one sooner or later.

cheers! Fred 14:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops!

Hi!

Very sorry, but I seemed to have accidentally reverted a sensible edit by you on the Civil Partnerships article. I was doing a revert to remove the remainder of the hideously POV "Criticisms" section in toto (how many time has it been said that it is not needed?!) and somehow I ended up restoring the whole ruddy thing! I blame a long day and my own stupidity! Anyway, just noticed the hiccup and have now tidied up my own mess.

Apologies again. 86.153.93.200 16:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for once again doing an rv on this silly POV pusher. (Same chap as before now with a user-name) Will fire a shot across the bows! Vacant Stare 06:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio Pini-Corsi and Italian operatic baritones

Just so we don't get our wires crossed, I changed Pini-Corsi from the bass to baritone cats because I thought it was a mistake. (I've been trying to clean out some of the main voice cats (Sopranos etc) so that they can be used by the bot.

At the moment the Project page recognizes the main voice cats etc (see Singers cats.) but not the 'operatic' ones etc. I am not against changing the system but it needs to done systemmatically - probably by cleaning up the cat and then moving it as a whole. After all we have 1,000 odd singers. Also I think we need to discuss it on the Project page so that everybody is on board. This really isn't a trivial change. -- Kleinzach 06:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Silver Tassie

Thanks for checking over that. My guess is that the editor of the ENO programme went through replacing the voice ranges with the singer's names. Instead of replacing "heroic baritone", (s)he just replaced baritone. --Peter cohen 18:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the agent's page [2] it is Mark Le Brocq. You see why I wanted some to check over the page. I put in the redlinks because I thought it was standard after comments on Blond Eckbert. If you feel it unnecessary, then feel free to change things.
When you said you were interested in certain operas in my list, did you mean that you were going to work on them or that you thought I should prioritise them? From my point of view, I want to do Die Feen fairly soon, so that some work can be seen to have happened because of the Wagner project being started. Smetana is someone I'm fond of. I agree about Dalibor. (After all I have two recordings on CD and had one on vinyl.) And Libuse is important as it's an occasional piece - opened the Prague National Theatre twice and, according to the sleeve notes, new productions were introduced on important Czech anniversaries. Otherwise, I'm thinking of doing a lot of the modern operas where I got the libretti from ENO with the programme booklet, as not many wikipedians are likely to have the text. That's why Blond Eckbert and Tassie were the first two of these articles I created. I've got some new CDs that I'm working through (the EMI boxes of 50CDs each, Beethoven and Schubert, decent performances too). Once I've finished them, I may opt to pick favourite operas on my to-do-list and play them while I update their articles. --Peter cohen 22:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dramma per musica

Well, you can discount that example if you like. What I was really getting at is that all the definitions of opera that I've seen call it a form of musical drama so we should say this too within the first sentence. To be honest, I'd rather go back to the early May version of the intro, fix the few outstanding problems with that, and have done with it. We really need to concentrate on adding new sections to that main article. As far as I can see there isn't a section on famous singers through the ages, on operatic staging, or anything about opera-going as a social event. Cheers. --Folantin 10:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stub question

GT: thanks for the kind note. Just a question; I've read the stub article section, but is there some sort of agreed-upon custom of how much content an article has to no longer be a stub? I realize this is kind of an "I know it when I see it" kind of situation. Thanks, DJRafe 19:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Default sort

Thanks for your help with this. I hope that if we can draw people's attention to the default sort tag they will put it in first time when they do the cats! -- Kleinzach 01:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernd Weikl

Thanks for your note on Bernd Weikl. I had been somewhat taken aback by the speedy deletion of the article but if he's good enough for Grove ...

The lesson is plainly to ensure the initial article establishes the notability, even if only at a basic level.

Brother Francis 11:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera/Opera Work List

If I remember rightly you were in favour of retiring this. What do you think? Can we take it off the project page? -- Kleinzach 23:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the work list into a re-direct to The opera corpus and removed the link (and text) on the project page. I take your point about the List of operas but there are people occasionally contributing to it and I think it would be impossible to get it deleted. In any case it seems that interfacing with Afd or Cfd just invites bringing trouble back to the Opera Project. The last two major disruptions we've had started that way.
I've been going through the whole of the opera corpus restoring the Category:Operas. I have now done D to Z and have about 1,000 works. When I finish (what has been a terrible labour) we will have a good idea of how many opera articles we have. (I never worked out a way of counting blue links on the opera corpus). -- Kleinzach 00:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don Carlo

If you like to do a new synopsis - presumably the French 5 act version - I will be happy to withdraw my old one completely. I don't think it would be a good idea to stick a French Fontainebleu Act 1 in front of the Milan 4 acter. -- Kleinzach 11:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opera Corpus (with errors)

I certainly have no objections to your knowledgeable assistance. I am a relative newcomer to Wikipedia, or at least I have limited experience with it. But I am interested in this and many other areas as you can see from my previous contributions. I am able (and willing) to learn. And I appreciate the assists I have been receiving from you and several other wikipedians. Thank you.Canticle 10:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments, ranking

I've been turning your ideas about assessments around in my mind for a while (and also considering Moreschi's approach in Opera article ranking), and I'm wondering whether you might be interested in doing a pilot version for the Richard Wagner Project. This has only a few articles so it would be easy to do the assessments and if it's successful it could be a protype for the Opera Project. Please let me know what you think! -- Kleinzach 03:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent you an email. -- Kleinzach 01:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are we having communications problems? Did you get the email? It's been a week but I've heard nothing. No big problem but I'm wondering if something has got lost in the ether. -- Kleinzach 05:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leeds Parish Church

Thanks for spotting and fixing my duff link. PamD 20:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC) (Yes, I decided to shorten my username a couple of months ago, and am currently spending too much time on miscellaneous wikiediting!)[reply]

Quite agree re importance of checking all links - mildly mortified to have missed that one - have just this moment been reminding someone else about checking links and sorting out disambiguations (eg "Beeston"). I'd just found a useful template someone has created for "Images of England" so used it on two pages where I'd linked to that site... with a bit of careless copy-and-pasting. PamD 20:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Offenbach

I integrated the "Trivia" section into the other sections and moved the critical reception and Zola stuff below the list of works. I also listified the various posthumous works. See what you think. -- Ssilvers 04:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Der Vampyr

Hehe... I cheated - I examined a few pages using edit to find out how other people were doing it. It's surprisingly easy to add an image in the top right - the short bit of code goes right on the top line. Lethesl 18:18, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner Project assessment page

Just to say I have filled in this page with your scheme. Perhaps you would like to review it, editing where necessary? -- Kleinzach 07:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation

The idea is excellent, of course (I have not found a "Speculation" section in other encyclopedias). Although Awadewit quite rightly would prefer that the section be integrated into Life forthwith, I would very strongly suggest that you withhold such work until after the FAC. In my experience, it is really tough to bring off changes like that during FAC, when we need a certain stability. The other thing, which you may not be aware of, is that it was a heck of a job to fight against the anti-Stratfordians for the present minimal wording in the authorship section. In a sense ,we got the minimal wording in return for allowing the section. Every word to do with that matter will probably have to be thrashed out ad nauseam with the anti-Stratfordians: I'd rather deal with that away from the FAC, because the last FAC became unseemly over the matter. One thing you might do, perhaps, is plan the edits in a sandbox, which is what I do with structural edits. I don't expect the FAC to last much longer than a week more.qp10qp 17:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. I've just checked it out. It seems he is called "of Stratford-upon-Avon" on three legal documents (not counting the will). In two cases (Combe and Huband), he was living in London at the time. Anyway, I've cut it, because it's so-whattish, after all. And it gave the impression he was proud of Stratford, in some way—which is a bridge too far. Also, I prefer simple, declarative sentences at the beginning of sections.qp10qp 18:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opera

Just been looking at your userpage. I love opera too: my favourites are probably Katya Kabanova and La Fanciulla del West (Domingo version). My favourite thing of all, though, is polyphony: the early Tudor stuff in particular (Ludford and co.). (No article on Ludford, I notice. May be I could chuck a sleevenote up.)qp10qp 18:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Richard Wagner

Hi. I'm mystified by your making this page into a circular reference! Am I missing something? -- Kleinzach 01:37, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
I commend you for all of your hard work on William Shakespeare. To compose and copy edit articles with multitudes of other people is never easy. You have helped produce a fascinating and eminently readable article. Think how many high school essays will reflect your language! :) Awadewit | talk 04:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article ranking/Singers

I've done a points scheme for singers here. I wonder if you could have a look at it? -- Kleinzach 04:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your email, however I can't find any message from you about the Singer rating system. Strange - can you write again perhaps? -- Kleinzach 11:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments - which I agree with. I've done a new version and added it to the Wagner assessments page. -- Kleinzach 04:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music drama

(Let me answer your last question first.) I saw this article recently. I prefer the treatment Millington gives the subject. Our article is too broad I think. It's in the opera genres cat. where it does no harm. IMO it would be better not to start a Music drama cat as it would be so difficult to define. Also I don't think it needs to be put in the Wagner Project (actually many Wagner articles are not covered by the Wagner cats. but that's another problem for another day). I'd be inclined to just leave it alone, though you could raise the same questions you have put to me on the Opera Project if you wanted. -- Kleinzach 23:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner assessments

You write: "will start reviewing . . . I'll use my points system . . . After that, I'll go through them using the Moreschi system. What should I do if that produces a different grade?"

IMO we should edit the points system and the 'Moreschi system' so they do correspond as far as possible from the beginning. Otherwise people will find the overall assessment system too complex. (I've already modified the 'Moreschi system' so it's no longer pure Moreschi anyeway.) -- Kleinzach 23:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You write "inserting "|class=stub" into the banner a) positions the Stub box directly under the Wagner picture, where it looks very odd" - well, it's the same as the Opera Project banner.
and "there's no provision in the Wagner template for a statement alongside saying something like "This article has been rated as x-Class on the assessment scale . . ." - We'll have to ask SatyrTN about this. I'll leave a note for him.
I see you have left the Assessment page untouched. Does that mean it's perfect? IMO getting that right is really more important than the handful of Wagner article assessments. -- Kleinzach 03:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The opera corpus

A new user called 'Schwarze wolken' (Black clouds!) has been adding a large number of titles to the list. Perhaps you would like to have a look? I've been trying to check them but there are a lot of them - maybe two pairs of eyes would be better than one! -- Kleinzach 04:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer from SatyrTN about Wagner Project banner

This is what he says:

. . . When I take a look at that banner, it looks great! And on a page that uses it, for instance Talk:Das Judenthum in der Musik, it looks like it's working just fine. . . .
The "auto" parameter is usually put there just in case a bot adds the banner, for whatever reason. If it's not included, it doesn't do anything. For example, anyone can (manually) put the code {{Wagner |class=Start}} on a page and it will add the banner. . . . -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is that OK. Does it answer your question? -- Kleinzach 15:45, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shakespeare project - New collaboration debate

The Shakespeare project's first collaboration has ended in success, with William Shakespeare reaching FA status! Congrats to all who chipped in! We also had success in our second collaboration Romeo and Juliet, which is now a GA. Our next step is deciding which article to collaborate on next. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Shakespeare#Next Collaboration to help us choose. Thanks. Wrad 04:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner again

Glad you are talking directly to SatyrTN, that's a beter way of doing it.

Re Die Feen and Rienzi, I'd be inclined to give both of them 40 points as start class. They both have three or four viable sections. Articles like these don't usually have stub tags. What do you think? -- Kleinzach 09:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hamlet

The Shakespeare Project's new collaboration is now to bring Hamlet to GA status. Wrad 00:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Die Hochzeit

Can we set up Die Hochzeit for assessment? I've tried to do it but still can't work out how it's done. -- Kleinzach 23:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've done it now. -- Kleinzach 01:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Makropulos and other operas in the box

I'm fine with limiting the singers entries to 5 max, but don't know this opera at all, so can't say who should out after the first 3 or 4.

As for having more than 1 name to a line, I feel that it'll look very messy, which is why I started out with fixed line widths for that column....

Viva-Verdi 22:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chantrell

I've made a redirect from the Dennis-less version! PamD 17:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Friedlinde Wagner

We are split - albeit narrowly - at Talk:Friedlinde Wagner/Comments. Can you adjudicate? -- Kleinzach 03:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Der Zar lässt sich photographieren

It's not really important but the previous order of roles was based on the fact that the 'false' characters appear (or sing?) before the real ones. -- Kleinzach 09:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, in that case, no problem. You have better info than I had. -- Kleinzach 11:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vladimir Jurowski

The question of infoboxes has now come up on the Classical Music Project - here. -- Kleinzach 06:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Educational establishments in York

I have nominated Category:Educational establishments in York (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Education in York (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. BencherliteTalk 20:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Small world indeed

Indeed, one of the pillars of the Peterocracy (North, Clarke, Mirfield et al) - there was a whole article on the phenomenon in the college magazine a few years ago. No worries on the York education category - was driving through the "category" section of Special:Newpages to see what was there, and thought that the York one looked slightly unusual. You should see some of the real oddities that pass through WP:CFD - User:Xtifr/FunnyCat is the latest list, following on from User:Dr._Submillimeter/Humorous_categories. If you've not seen them before, enjoy! BencherliteTalk 21:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Passenger services on Foss Islands Branch Line

Hi - presumably passenger trains on the DVLR would have continued over the Foss Islands branch into the main staion in York - or did they terminate at Layerthorpe? If they did, these ran until 1926, so there would have been passenger services over the line before 1927. – Tivedshambo (talk) 21:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the map to your comments. Somewhere I have a photo of a train at Rowntree Halt, from the one occasion I travelled on it before it closed. If I ever find it I'll scan it in and add it to thee article. – Tivedshambo (talk) 22:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments notice draft

My draft for the notice to go on the Opera project is here. Please let me know what you think. -- Kleinzach 05:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've consolidated everything on my talk page and replied there. -- Kleinzach 23:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xerse (Cavalli)

To answer your question, perhaps belatedly: Moreschi put a note about this on the Talk page. -- Kleinzach 06:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I dimly remember this. But curiously Adam Cuerden has just moved the article to Xerse. Is this a coincidence? -- Kleinzach 09:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway I've just done a quick stub on Xerse (Bononcini) so the three operas (Cavalli, Bononcini and Handel) now all have pages. -- Kleinzach 11:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the move to Xerse was to avoid some stupid false-disambiguation and edit-warring. If it could actually USE disambiguation, poke me and I'll undo some of the protections I set up against edit warring. Adam Cuerden talk 18:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Texts

Noble of you to volunteer to sort this out. Please let me know if I can offer any kind of backup. -- Kleinzach 04:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On November 8, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Louis Antoine Jullien, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Really realy realy realy real (36 times) interesting....Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opera

I moved the title because "Hänsel und Gretel" is the German title for the story - it can refer to the story OR to the play. IMO the best move is to simply redirect "Hänsel und Gretel" to "Hansel and Gretel," add a notice stating that "Hänsel und Gretel" redirects to "Hansel and Gretel" and that the person may be looking for the play of the same name.

With Romeo and Juliet I am considering moving the opera also to a "opera" page, and then redirecting the French Opera title to "Romeo and Juliet" since the story and the play have the same title in French. -- WhisperToMe (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Croesus

I am extremely grateful for your entry on Keiser's opera without which, when I saw it last night at the Lowry in Salford, I would have been completely lost. I have made a couple of minor changes; I also wondered about "Singe-Spiel" (rather than Singspiel) in line 2, which is not an expression I have met; but from your talk page you clearly know much more about opera than I do. JohnCD (talk) 21:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don Giovanni

No problem, I learnt something, be it a vowel in Da Ponte's libretto! Being Italian mother tongue is what induced me into error, because "del" would be correct too, and even slightly more natural-sounding, at least today. Bye, Goochelaar (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rossini

Weel, drat. Probably a bit early to get many engravings of the premières, might get Moïse et Pharaon/Zora or a revival. Oh, well. I've been getting a lot of Donizetti incidental to the Wallace/Balfe work, so some good will come of it. Adam Cuerden talk 18:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Royal Danish Opera

Did you manage to find anything more about this?Nrswanson (talk) 19:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]