User talk:Martinevans123/Archive 17
Happy Christmas and a Peaceful New Year to all
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/Linz_Schlossmuseum_-_Eggelsberger_Altar_1a_Geburt_Christi.jpg/280px-Linz_Schlossmuseum_-_Eggelsberger_Altar_1a_Geburt_Christi.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Adoration_of_the_Magi_Tapestry_detail.png/300px-Adoration_of_the_Magi_Tapestry_detail.png)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/GFerrari_Adorazione_pastori_VC_%28detail%29.jpg/200px-GFerrari_Adorazione_pastori_VC_%28detail%29.jpg)
Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.
Happy Christmas and Best wishes for a peaceful 2024. "Csordapásztorok"
Ring-a-ling-a-ling-a-ding-dong-ding!
2023 - missiles not fireworks
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/Vladimir_Putin_17-11-2021_%28cropped%29.jpg/150px-Vladimir_Putin_17-11-2021_%28cropped%29.jpg)
Kyiv hit by Russian missiles on New Year's Eve. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:10, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- 12 months on... "Russia targets Ukraine ‘military’ sites in retaliation for Belgorod attack": "...at least six missiles hit Kharkiv, Ukraine’s National Police said on Sunday, injuring at least 22 people and hitting 12 apartment buildings, 13 residential houses and a kindergarten. ... Earlier, Ukrainian officials said that among those injured in Kharkiv were two boys aged 14 and 16 and a security adviser for a team of German journalists." Martinevans123 (talk) 10:34, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Martinevans123!
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Fuochi_d%27artificio.gif/212px-Fuochi_d%27artificio.gif)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Happy_new_year_01.svg/177px-Happy_new_year_01.svg.png)
Martinevans123,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 00:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 00:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks very much, Moops. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | |
happy new year |
---|
- ... and also from me --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Gerda. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- today, I point at two singers I whose performance I enjoyed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. You must be one of them pointy editors! RIP Anita. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC) (William "Smitty" Smith – organ)
- ...and just for good measure Martinevans123 (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC) (Stephen Mitchell – synthesizers)
- you understood, see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw Domen Križaj, thanks. Gosh, DYK is such hard work. Here he is with The Trumpet Shall Sound from you know what. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC) (Jernej Gantar - trumpet)
- today, less pointy: a composition from a remarkable 2022 concert, the sad record of four articles about people who recently died on the Main page at the same time, and singing for Epiphany - I'm taking a break from DYK, see my talk, - these are the last ones for a while, and then I'll write my unwritten stories - a good title for that wanted. Just look for the difference between suggestion and were the broad audience got us for Galina Pisarenko (see talk there), - with the interlude of rejecting her downright, - which was probably the last straw. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- Today's featured article is Osbert Parsley, not by me but Amitchell125 where I commented, including the beginning of my songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the links, Gerda. No relation to this Parsley I'm guessing (voiced by Gordon Rollings, I think). Martinevans123 (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- no ;) - I'm on vacation, - click on songs! I tell my own stories now, instead of relying on DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Today's topic Elisabeth Waterhouse. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Today's: Elena Manistina, or: why Tchaikovsky's The Enchantress isn't on the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- one more day of pics but the last three will take more time - back home --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- 2 more done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- and now the rest - Melitta Muszely died, RIP - the other story is 10 years old OTD ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the links, Gerda. No relation to this Parsley I'm guessing (voiced by Gordon Rollings, I think). Martinevans123 (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw Domen Križaj, thanks. Gosh, DYK is such hard work. Here he is with The Trumpet Shall Sound from you know what. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC) (Jernej Gantar - trumpet)
- you understood, see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- ...and just for good measure Martinevans123 (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC) (Stephen Mitchell – synthesizers)
- Thanks, Gerda. You must be one of them pointy editors! RIP Anita. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC) (William "Smitty" Smith – organ)
- today, I point at two singers I whose performance I enjoyed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Gerda. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- ... and also from me --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Always precious
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always, in your own sweet way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- ... great memories of the Jacques Loussier Trio and the Dave Brubeck Quartet in one hall ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Let's not forget Dave Greenfield (1949–2020)... Martinevans123 (talk) 18:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- And could I possibly prevail on you, yet again, to archive June: from "Question" to "June 2022"? Many thanks for your help. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- sure --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- And could I possibly prevail on you, yet again, to archive June: from "Question" to "June 2022"? Many thanks for your help. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Let's not forget Dave Greenfield (1949–2020)... Martinevans123 (talk) 18:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- ... great memories of the Jacques Loussier Trio and the Dave Brubeck Quartet in one hall ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Moneytrees Thank you for your edits at Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky Air Flight 251 (2021). I think these passages, now removed, might provide useful details about the crash:
- "
The air traffic controller told the crew they were on a bearing of 340 degrees (north-northwesterly rather than the west-northwest 289 bearing instructed by the NDB procedure).
"
and
- "
The terrain at the point of impact is about 260 metres (850 ft) high, on a coastal cliff topped with trees (tree height 10 metres (33 ft)).
"
I'm not yet sure how these details might be re-worded. But I wanted to check whether or not you think they should be re-added. Another question is whether Av Herald is the best source, or if we should just use official investigation reports, if available. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:10, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Not Moneytrees, obviously, but thought I'd stick my beak in, which I'm hoping is not too intrusive. I've little idea of aviation terminology so won't edit the article directly, but if I were to incorporate the above text, I'd try something like the following:
The aircraft
collided with a steepreportedlycoastal
cliff with a maximum elevation of 263 metres (863 ft)and tree cover to a height of 10 metres (33 ft)
.— Current lines in Accident section, 2nd par; with suggested changes ingreen
More: Current v suggested |
---|
- So, not sure if changes keep the details technically correct, but I think it's sufficiently different from the sources to not be a close paraphrase. Only a suggestion, which someone who knows about such things may add if they wish. Hope it helps, anyway. AukusRuckus (talk) 10:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, AukusRuckus. That looks good to me. But then I'm probably not the best judge. Using "
crew performed final approach manoeuvres (base and final turns)
" in place of "crew performed the base and final turns
" also seems ok. The question about that source remains; perhaps an editor such as Ahunt might like to comment. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)- Thanks for the ping. From a terminology point of view "final approach manoeuvres" is odd and vague wording and likely the result of uneven or non-standard translation in the original report. I would suggest
the crew flew the base and final turns
. - Ahunt (talk) 12:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)- Many thanks Ahunt, for the rapid response. Feel free to add back whatever seems useful there, as I am unable to. I am assuming you are happy to use Av Herald as the source. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Done - Ahunt (talk) 13:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding the source. Are any of those other details needed? I had thought they were useful. Thank you. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that wording was useful,
Fixed. - Ahunt (talk) 14:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's great, Ahunt. Many thanks for your help. And thank you again AukusRuckus. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that wording was useful,
- Thanks for adding the source. Are any of those other details needed? I had thought they were useful. Thank you. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks Ahunt, for the rapid response. Feel free to add back whatever seems useful there, as I am unable to. I am assuming you are happy to use Av Herald as the source. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. From a terminology point of view "final approach manoeuvres" is odd and vague wording and likely the result of uneven or non-standard translation in the original report. I would suggest
- Many thanks, AukusRuckus. That looks good to me. But then I'm probably not the best judge. Using "
Hello Ovinus, I hope the New Year finds you well. I was wondering if anything could be salvaged at Politicz. I think I assumed, 8 years ago. that blockquotes were ok. But my edit summary did express some doubts. No-one else, in the intervening 7 years, seemed to have a problem with them. I guess the last bit could be rewritten e.g.:
Dean McFarlane at AllMusic, compares "the eccentric quality" of Coyne's recordings with those of Robert Wyatt and Van Morrison, and describes Politicz as "a post-punk album with a humorous political agenda."[1]
But what of Coyne's own sleeve notes? I am now looking at WP:COPYPASTE, which says this:
- "
Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. Use of copyrighted text must be in compliance with Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria policy. This means that the quotation must not be replaceable with free text (including one that the editor writes), must be minimal, must have contextual significance and must have previously been published.
"
and WP:NFCC, which says this:
- "
3. Minimal usage:
- a. Minimal number of items. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information.
- b. Minimal extent of use. An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low-resolution, rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement).
- ...
- "
8. Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
"
At the time I had thought of re-writing his notes, so that they were indeed replaceable with free text. But then I thought that any paraphrase or re-write would not be adequate. He is the actual artist, after all. So the original material might well significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. I had also thought of using just perhaps one or two examples; but then thought that my editorial decision, of which to use and which to exclude, would constitute WP:OR.
Are these the appropriate policies? Perhaps they get trumped by WP:UNDUE? I'd be very grateful if you could advise. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well, our copyright policy trumps helpfulness to readers, and the length of the quotes in question is beyond what NFCC allows. Thankfully, helpfulness to readers and abiding by our copyright policy aren't incompatible. In this case, excerpting the most salient parts of the artist's words, interspersed with ellipses or transitional paraphrases, is probably the way to go. You're of course welcome to try that here. Regarding whether that is original research: If selecting what information to include and exclude from a passage were OR, most of Wikipedia would be in violation. I agree more caution is required with direct quotes, to avoid taking words out of context or -- in the case of controversial topics -- bowdlerizing them, but it's still usually possible to capture someone's voice in fewer words. Ovinus (talk) 19:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Ovinus. I may try. When you say "the length of the quotes in question is beyond what NFCC allows", exactly what length is allowed? Is that always a finite length, or is it a proportion of the original? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Is that second part an acceptable summary of the AllMusic source? I now find that Buckley (2003) argues that the album "
... indicated a loss of focus, partly induced by Coyne's alcoholism and his marriage break-up.
" So that might be usefully added. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC) - (edit conflict) Hm, for now I would say take whichever is smaller of three sentences and 25% of the original text. But it's quite context dependent. There are cases where long quotes make sense and places where they don't. I would say quoting a reviewer's entire review is generally not encyclopedic, hence why I only chose a part of it. In any case, I would recommend you focus on paraphrasing and avoid quoting entirely until you feel confident paraphrasing. Ovinus (talk) 20:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well I was trying above to paraphrase that McFarlane review, which is desperately short to begin with. Yes, I can accept that the length may be context dependent. I just want to be clear that "whichever is smaller of three sentences and 25% of the original text" is not policy, but your subjective opinion. And I'm not sure how one would accurately render Buckley's 14 words without a quote. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oh sorry, I didn't see that you made a paraphrase up there. I think it's fine. And yes, that's my opinion, not policy. Ovinus (talk) 20:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Cool. Well if that's the yardstick you have used to add quotations, and you have not been challenged for copyvio by other editors, I'm very happy to follow suit. Just to be clear - are those above the most appropriate policies for this case, or should I also be following others? I fully realise that some editors might argue that the lack of secondary sources for this album suggests it is not notable. I'd obviously disagree! A secondary alternative (which I now remember I also considered at the time) was adding an image of the back cover of the album, with all the notes visible to be simply read. But that seemed less useful and also probably a copyvio, as only the front cover is usually permitted. Many thanks for your help. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- As Ovinus said, it's just his subjective yardstick and not written down in policy anywhere. I'm afraid you just won't find a yardstick that actually is written down in policy. There are essay discussions of the concept at WP:COPYQUOTE and WP:NPS, but nobody sets a number that divides OK from too-much. Even real-world legal concepts such as right to quote do not set explicit length criteria. (Insert joke about size doesn't matter, then insert joke about insert.) --Tryptofish (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Ah yes. So do you agree with that subjective yardstick or not? If there's no clear policy, then a block for breaching coyvio, by an Administrator, in that case, would be a subjective judgement (just like so many other Admin actions)??
- Copyright joke for all you Scientific Americans:
- Argon walks into a bar.
- The bartender looks up and says, "I'm sorry, we don't serve noble gases here."
- Argon doesn't react, because reacting has been copyrighted by The Fine Bros since 2016.
- Copyright joke for all you Scientific Americans:
- "I thang u!" Martinevans123 (talk) 22:32, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm personally ambivalent about that yardstick, which is another way of saying I don't know. But yeah, it's subjective. (Can one make a fart joke about noble gasses?) --Tryptofish (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's considered frightfully rude to fart before Charles or Camilla. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's good to know. I promise to fart only after they do. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Pleased to hear you ain't one o' dem trumpy old Proud Boys.Martinevans123 (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Will try my best to steer away from Trypto's incendiary Republican toilet-humour and bring discussion back on track a little... Martinevans123 (talk) 11:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- Pleased to hear you ain't one o' dem trumpy old Proud Boys.Martinevans123 (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's good to know. I promise to fart only after they do. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's considered frightfully rude to fart before Charles or Camilla. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm personally ambivalent about that yardstick, which is another way of saying I don't know. But yeah, it's subjective. (Can one make a fart joke about noble gasses?) --Tryptofish (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Ah yes. So do you agree with that subjective yardstick or not? If there's no clear policy, then a block for breaching coyvio, by an Administrator, in that case, would be a subjective judgement (just like so many other Admin actions)??
- As Ovinus said, it's just his subjective yardstick and not written down in policy anywhere. I'm afraid you just won't find a yardstick that actually is written down in policy. There are essay discussions of the concept at WP:COPYQUOTE and WP:NPS, but nobody sets a number that divides OK from too-much. Even real-world legal concepts such as right to quote do not set explicit length criteria. (Insert joke about size doesn't matter, then insert joke about insert.) --Tryptofish (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Cool. Well if that's the yardstick you have used to add quotations, and you have not been challenged for copyvio by other editors, I'm very happy to follow suit. Just to be clear - are those above the most appropriate policies for this case, or should I also be following others? I fully realise that some editors might argue that the lack of secondary sources for this album suggests it is not notable. I'd obviously disagree! A secondary alternative (which I now remember I also considered at the time) was adding an image of the back cover of the album, with all the notes visible to be simply read. But that seemed less useful and also probably a copyvio, as only the front cover is usually permitted. Many thanks for your help. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oh sorry, I didn't see that you made a paraphrase up there. I think it's fine. And yes, that's my opinion, not policy. Ovinus (talk) 20:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well I was trying above to paraphrase that McFarlane review, which is desperately short to begin with. Yes, I can accept that the length may be context dependent. I just want to be clear that "whichever is smaller of three sentences and 25% of the original text" is not policy, but your subjective opinion. And I'm not sure how one would accurately render Buckley's 14 words without a quote. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Is that second part an acceptable summary of the AllMusic source? I now find that Buckley (2003) argues that the album "
- Thanks Ovinus. I may try. When you say "the length of the quotes in question is beyond what NFCC allows", exactly what length is allowed? Is that always a finite length, or is it a proportion of the original? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Ovinus, despite your recommendation for me to "avoid quoting entirely", I'm very reluctant to simply paraphrase all of Coyne's sleeve notes into prose, which I'm worried might look a little clumsy and dull. Perhaps a mixture might be possible, along these lines:
In the album's sleeve notes, Coyne himself gives a brief explanation of each of the songs. The first side has a song about the Pope and one about a rich misogynistic man who is intent on misleading his son. Coyne describes the song "Liberation" as "about male-chauvinism ... an observation of the way many women are still treated; with (I hope) an optimistic ending." Side two opens with a song about believing in heroes and is followed by one about the obsession with discipline and work in Japan. There are also songs that address the bitterness involved when a relationship breaks down and the brutality of "dance-halls, discos, gathering places." The album closes with "I've Got the Photographs", a song that "attempts to bring photographs to life when, after all, they're only bits of paper."[2]
Is that to much direct quoting, or two much paraphrasing, or perhaps both? I think it complies with the "three sentences or 25%" dictum? Adding the sleeve notes and that Buckley source as refs would at least allow removal of the "single source" tag. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:57, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- Any comments on that, Ovinus? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello PMC. Hope you are well. I have been searching for that anonymous church booklet, but without success, I'm afraid. It's quite likely now gone to the local charity shop. I see that you also removed a short paragraph sourced to this site which, in the intervening 10 years, has now expired. The new site for the ministry team seems to be this one. I wonder if it might be worth adding that as an external link in the article? And/or possibly use it to restore some of the information that it provides. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Martin, sorry to hear that it's no longer available. Looks like the link to the ministry team is already in the external links section though, so if anyone wants to revamp the article on that basis, it is there. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. I must have missed that. Perhaps it should go in the infobox? If that first paragraph was indeed copyvio, might it be possible to suggest a version that was copyright compliant? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:44, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- Welllllllll...I'm looking at both the current and the archived version of the old website (here) and it doesn't mention anything about the benefice or the archdeaconry/deanery of the church. It's possible that I'm missing it so if you see it on the site just point me to where. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for that archive link, PMC, which I was unable to find. You're right, I can't find those terms either. So that must have been a mistake. All it has is Oxford Diocese. (But I see it also has a page on History, via Checkendon > Full history, which might be useful.) In England and Wales, "benefice" has come to be used interchangeably with "Ministry team" for a group of parishes. So perhaps that was all WP:OR. Do you maintain it was copyvio? I was just wondering how the information might be restored with other sources. This oneand this one might also help. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:56, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- I never said that specific paragraph was confirmed copyvio. When I stubbed the article, I did it as a presumptive deletion of the entire article because the major source couldn't be located. I'm not in doubt of the related churches, but calling it a "benefice" without a source is OR in my opinion. I've added the related churches with a reference to the ministry's website. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, PMC. I think that's a real improvement. And many thanks for clarifying. So the problem is just that there's no source, not that it's presumed to be a copyvio? So, just in theory, would this list of bell inscriptions be considered copyvio:
- I never said that specific paragraph was confirmed copyvio. When I stubbed the article, I did it as a presumptive deletion of the entire article because the major source couldn't be located. I'm not in doubt of the related churches, but calling it a "benefice" without a source is OR in my opinion. I've added the related churches with a reference to the ministry's website. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for that archive link, PMC, which I was unable to find. You're right, I can't find those terms either. So that must have been a mistake. All it has is Oxford Diocese. (But I see it also has a page on History, via Checkendon > Full history, which might be useful.) In England and Wales, "benefice" has come to be used interchangeably with "Ministry team" for a group of parishes. So perhaps that was all WP:OR. Do you maintain it was copyvio? I was just wondering how the information might be restored with other sources. This oneand this one might also help. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:56, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Welllllllll...I'm looking at both the current and the archived version of the old website (here) and it doesn't mention anything about the benefice or the archdeaconry/deanery of the church. It's possible that I'm missing it so if you see it on the site just point me to where. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. I must have missed that. Perhaps it should go in the infobox? If that first paragraph was indeed copyvio, might it be possible to suggest a version that was copyright compliant? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:44, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- 1. LESTER & PACK OF LONDON FECIT 1765.
- 2. LESTER & PACK OF LONDON FECIT 1765.
- 3. MUSIC’S MEDICINE TO THE MIND.
- 4. OUR VOICES SHALL WITH JOYFUL SOUND MAKE HILLS 8: VALLEYS ECHO ROUND.
- 5. IN WEDLOCK’S BANDS ALL YE THAT JOIN WITH HANDS YOUR HEARTS UNITE SO SHALL OUR TUNEFUL TONGUES COMBINE TO LAUD THE NUPTIAL RITE.
- 6. MEARS & STAINBANKS 1879 FOUNDRY LONDON. G.T. ABBY, H. HOPE AND A. TOBBITT CHURCH- WARDENS. GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST.
Or what about this list of Rectors and Patrons:
Rectors and Patrons | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I often see historical lists of clergy in churches, usually on a wooden board, often in the porchway. Are these also protected by copyright? Perhaps it depends on when they were produced? I assume that the inscriptions on gravestones are not copyright protected. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well, in the instance of the Peter & Paul church, as I said - I stubbed the entire article presumptively. In other words, without making a determination that it actually was CV, but with the presumption that it was, based on the other confirmed CV issues with the other church articles sourced to church pamphlets. Since you pinged me looking to restore it, I checked and confirmed that it was not CV, but that it was not quite properly sourced..
- A simple factual list of things generally cannot be copyrighted, assuming there is no subjectivity or creativity to the list. A list of people who held an office, along with their years of service, would generally fall under that, as it's an objective list that can't be written any other way. On the other hand, a subjective list that has some editorial input is subject to copyright. For example, the Rolling Stone 500 Greatest Albums List; even if it had no explanatory prose, there is creative input to the ordering of the list, so it would be copyrighted. The Copyright FAQ has a little more detail about your second question, if you ctrl+F the phrase "Facts cannot be copyrighted", it's that paragraph.
- However, copyright aside, I'm not sure lists of non-notable pastors and bell inscriptions are encyclopedic information that we should include in articles. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks for the clarification, PMC. And thanks for the link to that paragraph. I also see that the next paragraph begins: "
Data that is not subject to copyright may be, and indeed often should be, copied verbatim.
" I think I must have copied those lists from the pamphlet, assuming they were not protected by copyright. I cannot honestly remember how closely I copied the rest. But I may have made some shaky assumptions based on the fact the leaflet had no author, no publisher and no date. As I live nowhere near there, however, it's not really possible to check if the church still has copies. I suspect that the details of clergy and bell inscriptions were sourced by the church itself; the last date for the Rector being 1973 suggests the pamphlet hadn't been updated for some years. But the other historical/ architectural detail may have been sourced from elsewhere. I don't think any sources were quoted, or I might have sought them out. Perhaps there are snippets from those other sources that might be used to re-add some history/ architecture? e.g. this source gives the benefice, deanery and archdeaconry. Thanks for your help with this. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)- Right but... I didn't nuke the article because of those lists. I stubbed it presumptively because of the precedent set at Church of St Peter and St Mary, Stowmarket, where the entire article was primarily sourced to a church pamphlet and turned out to be entirely a light paraphrase of that pamphlet. Since the Peter & Paul church article was also primarily sourced to a church pamphlet, I made the call that the Peter & Paul article was likely to also be extensively paraphrased.
- I added the deanery to the text and updated the infobox. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, ok. So it wasn't just because there was no longer any extant source. You presumed it was all coyvio on the basis of my other failings at Stowmarket. That's perfectly reasonable, of course. It might have looked a bit odd if you just left the lists of bells and Rectors. If I do manage to locate any good alternative source(s), I may have a go at suggesting some replacement text. Thanks for adding that and updating. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- No problem. Separately, now that you've called the lists to my attention, I don't think they're particularly encyclopedic and believe they're better off left out. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think church historians and campanologists might disagree, but never mind. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC) p.s. it's the medieval chancel wall paintings, dating from 1330, that really deserve a mention. That's was what drew me to that church in the first place. Maybe there are some usable images somewhere.
- No problem. Separately, now that you've called the lists to my attention, I don't think they're particularly encyclopedic and believe they're better off left out. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, ok. So it wasn't just because there was no longer any extant source. You presumed it was all coyvio on the basis of my other failings at Stowmarket. That's perfectly reasonable, of course. It might have looked a bit odd if you just left the lists of bells and Rectors. If I do manage to locate any good alternative source(s), I may have a go at suggesting some replacement text. Thanks for adding that and updating. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks for the clarification, PMC. And thanks for the link to that paragraph. I also see that the next paragraph begins: "
Suggested addition
Could I perhaps suggest this to re-start a History section:
- Christianity was first brought to South Oxfordshire by St Birinus, in the 7th century, who converted the local chieftain Caeca. It is suggested that the first place of worship may have been a small wattle and daub structure erected on the site of a local pagan shrine. The church dates from 1152 when, influenced by the monks of Bec, the present nave, chancel and semi-circular apse were built, with a wooden tower over the chancel.[1]
- In the 15th century windows, a font, tower and porch were all added. A restoration in the Victorian era removed the exterior rendering, raised the floor levels in the chancel and apse, and completely refurnished the interior with new pews, a pulpit and a pipe organ. Rare 14th-century apse wall paintings in the apse were uncovered and were heavily restored. The plaster from the chancel walls was largely removed.[1]
- In the 20th century, the apse wall paintings were restored to be closer to their original condition. A new altar and choir stalls, made of local wood, were installed. In the 1950s the roof of the nave was completely renewed; local people hand-carved bosses, under the supervision of war artist and sculptor Eric Kennington, who was a churchwarden. Three modern windows were installed, one an etched window by Lawrence Whistler.[1]
- Around 2000 the organ was removed, to repair the wooden floor damaged by wet rot, and traces of medieval paint were uncovered on the chancel wall. After careful conservation, remains of high quality paintings dating from 1330 were revealed. These had escaped the Reformation as they had been plastered over. Experts from the Courtauld Institute, described the paintings as "extremely rare and significant" and the "most important find of its type in 20 years".[1]
- In 2012 the church was completely re-roofed, at a cost of over £300,000.[2]
Martinevans123 (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2023 Any comments on that, PMC? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- Your version has the same problems that your proposed text for Karl Jenkins had when we talked about it before. The overall structure is the same, most sentences are just reworded a little, paragraphs have the same sentences in the same order. It's a light paraphrase but still recognizably derived from the source. I'm still not sure you see the fundamental issue with the close paraphrasing, and how to write without doing that. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- I... don't think you do. 46 people have explained to you how to rewrite information in your own words, yet here we are. Seasider53 (talk) 09:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Seasider53:, violating WP:NPA, which is what you just did, is not effective as a way of helping an editor learn how to do things the right way. Maybe you see it as a way of virtue-signaling, but if you keep it up I will seek sanctions against you. Martin, please understand, however, that PMC has raised very important points, and you need to take that seriously. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Seasider53:, if I recall correctly your "explanation" to me was that everyone else learned what to do at school; followed by your exhortation that I was refusing to rewrite anything, in favour of simply asking other editors to re-write it for me. If you are keen to offer constructive criticism, by all means offer your appraisal of my suggested re-write for Politicz above, before we get feedback from Ovinus. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- Meanwhile here's a 13-word sentence from one of the sources:
- "
There was a complete re-roofing in 2012 at a cost of over £300,000.
"
- "
- I would be genuinely interested to see how you would rewrite it, to avoid copyright, and to ensure it's not "recognizably taken from the source", by using alternative words for starters... you know, things we learned at school." Thanks.
- Although it would be a waste of time for the article, of course, if that fact was simply considered to be "unencyclopeadic." Martinevans123 (talk) 19:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "
The building's roof was replaced in 2012, at a cost estimated to have been around £300,000.
"? Seasider53 (talk) 21:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)- That looks fine to me. Thanks, Seasider53. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- "
- Although it would be a waste of time for the article, of course, if that fact was simply considered to be "unencyclopeadic." Martinevans123 (talk) 19:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Meanwhile here's a 13-word sentence from one of the sources:
- I... don't think you do. 46 people have explained to you how to rewrite information in your own words, yet here we are. Seasider53 (talk) 09:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- PMC, thank you for your appraisal. Perhaps a more condensed version might be better? But I have also added two short sentences about the bells:
- The church dates from 1152 when, influenced by the monks of Bec, the present nave, chancel and semi-circular apse were built. At this time the chancel had a wooden tower. In the 15th century windows, a font, tower and porch were all added. In the Victorian era, as part of a restoration, exterior rendering was removed; inside the church the chancel and apse floor levels were raised, and new pews, a pulpit and a pipe organ were fitted. Plaster from the chancel walls was largely removed and "fine and rare" 14th-century apse wall paintings were uncovered, but also heavily restored.[1]
- PMC, thank you for your appraisal. Perhaps a more condensed version might be better? But I have also added two short sentences about the bells:
- In the 20th century, the apse wall paintings were brought closer to their original condition and a new altar and choir stalls were installed. The nave roof was completely renewed in the 1950s when local people hand-carved bosses, under the supervision of war artist and sculptor Eric Kennington, who was a churchwarden. Three modern windows were also installed. The When organ was removed, to repair the wooden floor, traces of medieval paint were uncovered on the chancel wall. After careful conservation, remains of high quality paintings dating from 1330 were revealed, having escaped the Reformation by being plastered over. Experts from the Courtauld Institute, described the paintings as "extremely rare and significant" and the "most important find of its type in 20 years".[1] In 2012 the church was completely re-roofed.[2]
- In 1765 six bells was installed and in 1879 these were re-hung in a metal frame with shell bearings. They were re-hung again in 1967, when two new bells were added and the bearings replaced with sealed lubricant units.[1]
- If you still find this version inadequate, I would very much appreciate your help in showing how it can be improved. I have assumed that it's better to keep the details, and thus the paragraphs, in chronological order, although the bells form their own topic. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- Martin, I know you're making good faith efforts here, but again, what you've done with this version is to remove some detail and slightly reorder some sentences. It's still fundamentally the same text as the version I looked at a week ago, which means it is still recognizably taken from the source. On top of that, the two sentences you've added about the bells are also taken from the source with only light change, which to me suggests that you still don't understand the problem.
- I'm truly sorry. Mentoring has never been my strong suit and I simply do not know how coach you how to approach writing any differently. I respect your efforts to improve but I just don't have the capacity to be involved any further. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:25, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm very sorry too. Yes, all of my efforts have been in 100% good faith. I had hoped you might have been able to give me small concrete examples on this one. Or is that "simply asking other editors to re-write it for me"? I suspect that the ability to identify the source may be a function of the number of sources, e.g. much easier when there is only one source. It looks like I will have to provide a third re-write and ask another editor to appraise it. I'll have to ask other editors to judge re-writes of other examples you have flagged up at the CCI. Thank you for all of your advice and patience.
- Notwithstanding a copyright law suit from the Langtree Team Ministry, the original text for the bells is this:
The bell tower has a peal of eight bells. The original peal of 6 bells was installed in 1765, as indicated by the inscription on some of the heavy back six. These were re-hung in 1879 when the metal frame with shell bearings was installed. They were re-hung again in 1967 when the peal was augmented to 8 bells. At the same time the shell bearings were replaced with sealed lubricant bearings.
- Perhaps a copyright compliant re-write might be: "The church has eight bells. Six of these were installed in 1765 and two more added in 1879"? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- If you still find this version inadequate, I would very much appreciate your help in showing how it can be improved. I have assumed that it's better to keep the details, and thus the paragraphs, in chronological order, although the bells form their own topic. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
So I guess I have to conclude from PMC's appraisal of the second attempt that nothing is worth saving, i.e. that none of that text is not a breach of copyright. If that's so, I'm some what surprised. But that's my problem, it seems. I've also had a look at the NHLE source (the text for which is actually taken from Sherwood and Pevsner (1974)), and which is currently used only for this:
- "
Its earliest parts are 12th-century and it is a Grade I listed building.[3]
"
Perhaps these details could be added:
- "
The exterior is of coursed flint with stone dressing; the chancel and apse have a plain tile roof. The porch is situated to the left of the nave centre and has a two-centre archway and two-light windows on each side. The doorway to the nave is Romanesque with a round arch supported on columns with decorated capitals. The tympanum has been restored. Inside the church the north door of the nave is blocked and has a sculpture by Eric Kennington. The font is from the 16th century. The nave roof is 15th-century and has carved wooden bosses at the intersection of the vault ribs. There are 13th-century wall paintings in the apse, which show a procession of apostles. In the chancel floor there are 15th-century monumental brass. There is also a window by Laurence Whistler.
"
(It seems the Ministry Team source has an incorrect date for the font). Could someone possibly tell me if this is again a breach of copyright, because it's "too close a paraphrase", with only "slight rearrangement in the order of sentences." Sorry but I am simply unable to suggest any other words for all those linked, and for most of those not linked. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Evening Martin - Yes, as we’ve discussed before, it can be tricky to summarise/recast architectural descriptions, particularly when they include multiple technical terms. If it would help, I can take a look at this church (it’ll be the weekend, not tomorrow) and have a stab at a first draft, which we could then use as the basis of a discussion. It’s a pity you can’t use one of my sandboxes as I think your Talkpage has a little too much of the glare of publicity these days! How about I email you something, we talk about it offline, and then we can see if the result meets with approval. Let me know. KJP1 (talk) 19:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Oh yes please, KJP. Kindly email me a good version and I'll just post it here, pretending it's all my own work.Thank you so much for such a swift and polite offer of real help. But I'm sorry to say I am considering a far simpler and more permanent method of avoiding the "glare of publicity". It seems I have nothing more to offer the project, other than to waste the time of competent editors like your good self. If I can't be trusted to use my own sandbox, the notion of using someone else's seems quite a step. If I'm still here by Saturday, I'll be sure to let you know. Thanks again. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)- I know it's been tough. But you've a lot to contribute on here. And you would be as much missed as I think you would miss it. Nothing precipitate. KJP1 (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Alas, no. I'd be very happy to tidy references, find sources, correct spelling errors, improve punctuation, make corrections of grammatical errors, discuss article re-naming, improve article structure, search for new copyright compliant images, add links to copyright compliant audio or video tracks, revert obvious vandalism, warn and report vandals and trolls, and yes actually report cut-and-paste copyvio.... etc., etc. ...all those activities that took 90% of my time here before July last year. But the way Wikipedia sanctions are structured means that, because PMC has shown above, that I don't really understand copyright, none of these things are possible. The risk to the project is too great, it seems, that I might add more copyvio content. Being locked in the padded cell of one's own Talk page looses it's attraction after six months. Especially when, after four months, a passing Administrator decides to remove one's TPA, because one hasn't requested an unblock and has just "accumulated 150k of chit-chat". Overriding all of this, seems to be principle that both blocking and unblocking here are at Admin discretion. And we still have the CCI that remains half finished and with which I am unable to help. Not a great recipe for future success, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Martin, back in my own teaching days, there were times when I would reach the point of feeling like a particular student was becoming more work than I wanted to give to it – but that was my job, and I was being paid to do it. Like all of us here, PMC is a volunteer rather than a paid professional, and it's entirely appropriate and reasonable for her to decide, any time she wants to, to switch her time and effort to something else. And that's what she has determined in her comment above. She has no more ability to determine your capacity to contribute than I do. It's not a determination that you cannot contribute positively here, just a determination that she wants to do something else.
- The decision to edit or not is entirely yours. And the fact that you have stuck with it, here in the narrow confines of your talk page, is truly impressive. I know it's unpleasant when people criticize you, and it's entirely up to you whether or not you want to put up with it. But please don't confuse that with the critics being right. "If I'm still here by Saturday" sounds like something I hope you don't mean: "here" should just mean WP. As KJP1 says, nothing precipitate.
- If you feel like taking a break from editing now, by all means. Once again, entirely up to you. No need to push yourself to edit when your heart is not in it. But if you want to work some more on this, on your talk page, know that there are plenty of us here who will be happy to help. Not to write it for you, of course. KJP1 is way better at writing about UK buildings than I am, but if there is any part of this where I could help, please let me know. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Trypto, for your sensible words and encouragement. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- I see that KJP1 has now very kindly added some additional sources to the Talk page. I was going to ask about that existing NHLE Listing text.... as I don't have a copy of Sherwood & Pevsner (1974). Is it copied from there? Does that mean it's a violation of copyright itself? Or how does NHLE get around that? Or is it paraphrased/ re-written by NHLE? Or is it all just facts, and "Facts cannot be copyrighted." Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Alas, no. I'd be very happy to tidy references, find sources, correct spelling errors, improve punctuation, make corrections of grammatical errors, discuss article re-naming, improve article structure, search for new copyright compliant images, add links to copyright compliant audio or video tracks, revert obvious vandalism, warn and report vandals and trolls, and yes actually report cut-and-paste copyvio.... etc., etc. ...all those activities that took 90% of my time here before July last year. But the way Wikipedia sanctions are structured means that, because PMC has shown above, that I don't really understand copyright, none of these things are possible. The risk to the project is too great, it seems, that I might add more copyvio content. Being locked in the padded cell of one's own Talk page looses it's attraction after six months. Especially when, after four months, a passing Administrator decides to remove one's TPA, because one hasn't requested an unblock and has just "accumulated 150k of chit-chat". Overriding all of this, seems to be principle that both blocking and unblocking here are at Admin discretion. And we still have the CCI that remains half finished and with which I am unable to help. Not a great recipe for future success, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- I know it's been tough. But you've a lot to contribute on here. And you would be as much missed as I think you would miss it. Nothing precipitate. KJP1 (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Evening Martin - Yes, as we’ve discussed before, it can be tricky to summarise/recast architectural descriptions, particularly when they include multiple technical terms. If it would help, I can take a look at this church (it’ll be the weekend, not tomorrow) and have a stab at a first draft, which we could then use as the basis of a discussion. It’s a pity you can’t use one of my sandboxes as I think your Talkpage has a little too much of the glare of publicity these days! How about I email you something, we talk about it offline, and then we can see if the result meets with approval. Let me know. KJP1 (talk) 19:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Another how-to tip
I see that various editors have lent their ideas of how to write while avoiding copyvio issues, and a lot of good ideas have been given already. I wanted to add another (the more tools in the toolbox, the better, right?). You've already got your source at hand (otherwise you wouldn't be in this pickle), so start reading the relevant page containing the content you want to add. Depending on whether you have an excellent memory, pretty good, middling, or lousy memory (like I do) read several sentences or a paragraph (me) to several paragraphs, or half a page or even a page. Now, turn away and towards a blank file in your fave text editing program. Without looking at the source, summarize what you just read, typing it into your notes program. You'll forget stuff, that's fine; just write what you remember, as a summary, in your own words, as if you are explaining it to class of intelligent 16-year olds. You won't remember everything (that is the point!) and it's possible you'll forget something important, like a name, or place. Just type "John Bas-something from Leic-something was born in 1158/1518/ and became Chief High-some-title-or-other of Strange-nameia..." i.e., don't get stuck, just keep typing and barge ahead, and avoid the temptation to go to the source to "get it right". When you are *completely done* summarizing what you read, that's the point to go back and get the right spelling of the names, places, exact dates, and so on from the source, but only that.
The trick is in picking a section long enough that you won't remember it very well, but not so long that you'll forget crucial, important basics. Did you forget an entire war that put an end to the kingdom you're writing about? Oops; the section was too long; try shorter next time. Did you do a terrific job, quite accurate in fact, not missing any details, and even getting some of the minor players and places in there, and some of the original wording? Oops; the passage you read was too short; try doubling it next time. (You may have to tweak it longer or shorter for subjects you know something about, vs. ones that are unfamiliar to you.) You'll find the sweet spot with some practice, that is, how long a passage to read so that you are guaranteed not to remember the words anymore, but still pick up the gist of all the main ideas. This, in fact, is the definition of what we do here as Wikipedia editors: WP:NOR policy says you should "research the most reliable sources on the topic and summarize what they say in your own words." This is a method to facilitate doing exactly that.
After I do my reading, I like to close my eyes, and just think to myself, "Okay, what did he just say?" And I pause a few seconds, working out in my head what the main two or three ideas were, maybe coming up silently with some wording, and finally, I go to my note program and type it out. When you're done with that, add the citation (definitely copying from the title/copyright page for this), and copy it (your words + the citation) into the article. Voila, you're done. You may feel a little panicky trying this for the first time, like "I'll get it all wrong", and you'll be tempted to cheat and look at the source again. Resist. Just go through the exercise, and see how you do. Would love to hear back, if this works for you. Does for me. Mathglot (talk) 08:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks for the top tip, Mathglot. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:14, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Geoffrey Arnold Beck (24 June 1944 – 10 January 2023)
RIP Jeff Beck.
- "After experimenting with “stretching rubber bands over tobacco cans and making horrible noises”, he graduated to an old and battered acoustic guitar, and then built his own instrument using a cigar box and a picture frame."
- - Adam Sweeting in The Guardian.. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC) "Blue Wind" from Wired (1976)
February songs
![]() | |
my daily stories |
yesterday's cantata, 300 years later --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
today a book, Alte Liebe, for Valentine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
... and today the regional festival - DYK of 13 years ago ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
My story on 24 February is about Artemy Vedel (TFA by Amitchell235), and I made a suggestion for more peace, - what do you think? - You can write it here. I probably told you that we sang Pärt's Da pacem Domine, but it fits here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Of the video's I like this best, not only because we work with the conductor ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thankyou so much, Gerda. Beautiful. Yes, eternal spherical sounds. So powerful. Just beautiful. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- today: two women whose birthday we celebrate today, 99 and 90! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:53, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Happy St David's Day!
[2] ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Haha...! Thank you, Ian. "Dydd Gwyl Dewi Hapus" a chi hefyd! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
March stories
![]() | |
my story today |
today: where I learned opera, + 3 women -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. An amazing looking building. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:05, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey Martin, since I heard that Roger Waters was going to re-record The Dark Side of the Moon, I thought I'd do likewise, but I can't send a 45-minute mp3 over email. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Mr Waters seems to have been on that lonely dark side for quite some time now? But maybe I'm just being unfair. Maybe just do one at a time! Martinevans123 (talk) 09:18, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
today a woman, a 2016 DYK remembered (our conductor was courageous and called her to step in for a concert on short notice, and she was interested! - only had no time that day in 2013. We got Gabriela Eibenová who was also great). Girls and women sang how Bach arranged Pergolesi's Stabat Mater to a new text paraphrasing Psalm 51, last Sunday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the links, Gerda. She is here in 2020 with Markéta Cukrová. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! more Pergolesi duet --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:59, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Latest singer I wrote about: Johanna Geisler, off the FAC of her famous husband. I envy you that could simply congratulate "his" author on the promotion. - Composer Marek Kopelent died, and it's Saint Patrick's Day --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda. The external link is to an amazing performance by VOCES8 at St Vedast Foster Lane. The piece commissioned for Louth Contemporary Music Society. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, the version I admire most! - Today we remember the 150th birthday of Max Reger, who saw the horrors of a world war right when it began in 1914, while others were still in high patriotic moods --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- BWV 1 today, and new pics, more of them tomorrow --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:15, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link Gerda. Here's a 2014 rendition of the original hymn translated by William Mercer (b. 1811) by Choir of Keble College Oxford, and also one by the Lautten Compagney / Wolfgang Katschner: [3] with Dorothee Mields. I hear today that Arvo Pärt has been jointly awarded Sweden's Polar Music Prize, with Chris Blackwell of Island Records and Angélique Kidjo. [4] [5]. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- thank you - sharing impressions from vacation on Madeira 20-30 March, pics now at 24 Mar from the peaks --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link Gerda. Here's a 2014 rendition of the original hymn translated by William Mercer (b. 1811) by Choir of Keble College Oxford, and also one by the Lautten Compagney / Wolfgang Katschner: [3] with Dorothee Mields. I hear today that Arvo Pärt has been jointly awarded Sweden's Polar Music Prize, with Chris Blackwell of Island Records and Angélique Kidjo. [4] [5]. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda. The external link is to an amazing performance by VOCES8 at St Vedast Foster Lane. The piece commissioned for Louth Contemporary Music Society. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
I miss the tiny print, nobody can pull it off as well as you. Hopefully you will escape the talk page exile soon but, if not, at least you'll always have Paris. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I never knew the charm of spring? But still a modest fan, you know. I often skip the T&Cs, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:37, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e3/Jeremy_Corbyn%2C_Tolpuddle_2016%2C_1_crop.jpg/220px-Jeremy_Corbyn%2C_Tolpuddle_2016%2C_1_crop.jpg)
"He stared at me and I felt a change!"
I wrote an article on That's 60s today - the first TV station I can remember that I can put on for hours without wanting to switch over. Even if it's some cheesy mid-1960s MOR stuff, you can always hope the next clip is Jimi Hendrix at the Royal Albert Hall. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Very nice. Ah yes, "Diddy" David Hamilton and good ol' Whispering Bob. Let's hope so. ... Not 'arf, pop pickers!! Martinevans123 (talk) 20:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- "It's astounding, Time is fleeting", perhaps. ... oh and sorry again, Ritchie, for the 87,000 tonnes of controlled waste, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
April songs
![]() | |
my story today |
Congratulations!! - My story today is about the Alchymic Quartet, - I went away from DYK but it's the last one from last year. - The songs are about vacation, continued. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda. Here's his Toccatina Precipitando. Timothy McGovern, bassoon; John Dee, oboe, it says (but not that one)... Very jaunty. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! - While we sang Da pacem Domine again, more serene than the first time. Found this Cry in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds wonderful. And that is just beautiful. Ah, Michael D. Higgins, bless him. Chamber Choir Ireland looks interesting. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:36, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- I made an exception from my DYK abstinence for Good Friday, - see my story today. Interesting to compare a hook 2023 style to one in 2012 (see my story today). - I sang, including chorales from Bach's greatest Passion. I recently listened to one by Homilius: a discovery! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:54, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. Isaac Watts (1707). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- how soft and strong! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Happy Easter, Gerda! Martinevans123 (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, also to you - in Germany, we still celebrate, see my story. - Happy it was. I loved to see Marian Anderson and her story of protest against discrimination by singing on Easter Sunday 9 April 1939 on the Main page yesterday. Impressions of Easter here and music here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- My story today, Messiah (Handel), was my first dip into the FA ocean, thanks to great colleagues. - a few pics added, one day missing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- A great article. Brian really put a lot of work into that. I guess it should be première, even though he was born in Brandenburg-Prussia.
Martinevans123 (talk) 18:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! - : I added, finally ;) - today's stories are about Johanna Geisler and Huub Oosterhuis, a singer and a songwriter. More here if you have time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the links. Last night BBC had the St John Passion from the 2008 Proms, with the Monteverdi Choir and the English Baroque Soloists, conducted by John Eliot Gardiner, with Mark Padmore and Peter Harvey. Wonderful. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Great! - Yesterday I listened to a young singer (in her prize winner's concert) whom I know since she was a baby on her mother's lap rehearsing the St Matthew Passion, conducted by her father. Some day she'll have an article, but not by me, - too close ;) - She'll be the only vocal soloist in both upcoming choral concerts, 6 May (Misatango) and 15 October (Duruflé Requiem). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Today is the 80th birthday of John Eliot Gardiner. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:20, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed. I had no idea he was an "Uphill Gardiner"[citation needed] (as a consequence of his unorthodox farming methods). Also... he favours Monteverdi over Bach. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- sure, or why would it be Monteverdi choir? - latest news ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I reckon he's good for any old baroque and roll.... [6]. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- the things you find because you heard a countertenor in a Handel opera --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- How fascinating, Gerda. Thank you so much. Les Talens Lyriques are quite wonderful, I think. I see your improvements at Stabat Mater (Pergolesi). And at Christopher Lowrey, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:19, 27 April 2023 (UTC) p.s. I see that OutThere has it on CD and am very tempted to buy!
- the things you find because you heard a countertenor in a Handel opera --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- I reckon he's good for any old baroque and roll.... [6]. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- sure, or why would it be Monteverdi choir? - latest news ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed. I had no idea he was an "Uphill Gardiner"[citation needed] (as a consequence of his unorthodox farming methods). Also... he favours Monteverdi over Bach. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the links. Last night BBC had the St John Passion from the 2008 Proms, with the Monteverdi Choir and the English Baroque Soloists, conducted by John Eliot Gardiner, with Mark Padmore and Peter Harvey. Wonderful. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! - : I added, finally ;) - today's stories are about Johanna Geisler and Huub Oosterhuis, a singer and a songwriter. More here if you have time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- A great article. Brian really put a lot of work into that. I guess it should be première, even though he was born in Brandenburg-Prussia.
- Happy Easter, Gerda! Martinevans123 (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
- how soft and strong! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. Isaac Watts (1707). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- I made an exception from my DYK abstinence for Good Friday, - see my story today. Interesting to compare a hook 2023 style to one in 2012 (see my story today). - I sang, including chorales from Bach's greatest Passion. I recently listened to one by Homilius: a discovery! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:54, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds wonderful. And that is just beautiful. Ah, Michael D. Higgins, bless him. Chamber Choir Ireland looks interesting. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:36, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! - While we sang Da pacem Domine again, more serene than the first time. Found this Cry in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
... more about the Gardiner news: part of the service in Welsh, and Bryn Terfel singing (whom I enjoyed as Verdi's Falstaff). - How do you like today's story? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Misatango coming up for me - 4 choirs and a great bandeonist, - will write her article tomorrow --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- That looks very exciting, Gerda! I wonder could I possibly ask you to archive for me, from "Blocks all round" to "Whatfield"? Thank you so much. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- archiving almost done - the program will grace the Main page on coronation day if running as planned - imagine! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you again, Gerda. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- archiving almost done - the program will grace the Main page on coronation day if running as planned - imagine! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
David Allen Kirwan
Hi Gimly24. Yes, I did find it online back in 2021, didn't I. GoogleBooks now gives me six snippet-view results. Perhaps you can see more, or see which one of those six uses the word "unusual"? Maybe the report of the Board of Enquiry uses that word, or something similar. I doubt the word "unusual" is under copyright to Lee. H. Whittlesey, or even to Roberts Rinehart... even when surrounded by several other words (like Kirwan's name and the place?) Or even by a whole Yellowstone sentence. But I can well understand your caution. One wouldn't want to get into hot water. And we wouldn't want to be quoting directly from Z-Library, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:39, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Martinevans, I have the paper book and numerical book in my possession. I do not know if you intentionally made a very dark joke here with "But I can well understand your caution. One wouldn't want to get into hot water" (it's not funny) or you were talking about as a general of thumb. I could search the book easily. Let me check it. There are 3 pages concerning his death. The first sentence along with a few others describe, like you said, an extremely rare occurence of someone who intentionally dove in an hot spring (I don't know of any of other cases like that), in this case to save a dog. Like i previously said in the 2021 discussion, falling in and dying from falling in a hot springs is not unusual, with thermal injuries happening each year and deaths uncommonly. The only things that would potentially make it unusual is "intentionally" "dove head first" "in the 202˚F Celestine Pool" "to save a dog". Another thing odd is that people yelling him not to go and he answered that he wouldn't but then proceed to dove in to get that dog...
- here :
- "IT IS A MYSTERY WHY ANYONE would dive headfirst into a Yellowstone hot spring merely to save a dog, but that is precisely what happened on July 20, 1981" (It is as presented in the book, the 6 first words capitalized).
- «Ratliff and another bystander both saw that Kirwan was preparing to go into the spring, and the bystander yelled, “Don’t go in there!” Kirwan yelled back, “Like hell I won’t!” Several more people yelled not to go in, but Kirwan took two steps into the pool then diving head-first into the boiling water. One witness described it as a flying, swimming-pool-type dive.»
- the term 'Unusual' is not said by the author (that's a fact). Does it imply that it is (it's a matter of opinion). He do not use a synonym of the word either (well according to the google search "unusual synonym") :
- From Oxford Languages, 'unusual' : "not habitually or commonly occurring or done." (well... the definition sums what the person did... all 3)
- Words of similar meanings (from De Oxford Languages) :
- "uncommon, abnormal, atypical, unexpected, surprising, unfamiliar, unwonted, different, strange, odd, curious, out of the ordinary, extraordinary, out of the way, unorthodox, uncustomary, unconventional, outlandish, offbeat, off-center, deviant, novel, singular, peculiar, queer, bizarre, freakish, quirky, alien, rare, scarce, few and far between, thin on the ground, exceptional, isolated, occasional, infrequent, irregular, sporadic, out of the common, weird, oddball, way out, freaky, something else, off the wall, backasswards, seldom"
- I feel that it probably shouldn't be included because "unusual" is not said & "mystery" is not a synonym. If you agree with this, should i remove it from the holding list ? thanks much. Gimly24 (talk) 23:43, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- actually, this website has the full story too : [7]. The owner of that site probably is doing something wrong. [well the text is a bit altered]
- The footnotes do not talk about the death that much but more about the dog breed. Gimly24 (talk) 23:52, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your very fulsome reply, Gimly24. Yes dark, my apologies. Perhaps you were related? But both, in fact. I guess you could open a discussion thread on the Talk page to try and gain consequence on which words are acceptable synonyms. Wouldn't be backasswards here, I guess, as he dived in. I tend to agree with you that if something is a mystery, no-one knows if it's unusual or not. But that's just my opinion. And do you think David Mikkelson at Snopes is in breach of copyright? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Martinevans,
- No i’m not related to this person.
- And it is my mistake, i didn’t see the section sources of the link. I thought he didn’t source the text. He is not in breach of copyright.
- what does backassward means anyways ? My birth tongue is french and some words were unknown to me (like i never heard or red them before) such as “unwonted” “backasswards” and “Queer”.
- I’m quite busy right now and I will let you know when or if i post a new thread regarding this person death on the talk page of the wikipedia page.
- Thank you for you reply and i hope you have a great day 😊. - Gimly24 Gimly24 (talk) 13:57, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your very fulsome reply, Gimly24. Yes dark, my apologies. Perhaps you were related? But both, in fact. I guess you could open a discussion thread on the Talk page to try and gain consequence on which words are acceptable synonyms. Wouldn't be backasswards here, I guess, as he dived in. I tend to agree with you that if something is a mystery, no-one knows if it's unusual or not. But that's just my opinion. And do you think David Mikkelson at Snopes is in breach of copyright? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Happy Easter
![]() | Happy Easter ![]() |
A song from Sebastian Demrey and Jimmy Lahaie Martinevans123 (talk) 09:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC) and some organ music from Swansea |
À toi la gloire
1. À toi la gloire, O Ressuscité!
À toi la victoire pour l’éternité!
Brillant de lumière, l’ange est descendu,
Il roule la pierre du tombeau vaincu.
À toi la gloire, O Ressuscité!
À toi la victoire pour l’éternité!
2. Vois-le paraître: C’est lui, c’est Jésus,
Ton Sauveur, ton Maître, Oh! ne doute plus!
Sois dans l’allégresse, peuple du Seigneur,
Et redis sans cesse: Le Christ est vainqueur!
À toi la gloire, O Ressuscité!
À toi la victoire pour l’éternité!
3. Craindrais-je encore? Il vit à jamais,
Celui que j’adore, le Prince de paix;
Il est ma victoire, mon puissant soutien,
Ma vie et ma gloire: non, je ne crains rien!
À toi la gloire, O Ressuscité!
À toi la victoire pour l’éternité!
Edmond Louis Budry (1854–1932), from hymnary.org, (by: The Hymn Society and others)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Mail-message-new.svg/40px-Mail-message-new.svg.png)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
KJP1 (talk) 10:09, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, KJP. They look very useful. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:03, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi Tim O'Doherty. You say here, "The image has now been changed: would like to hear your thoughts on it." But it's the same picture as used since 2021? Neveselbert made a change here, on 12 April, with the edit summary "rv copyvio", although there was no image visible. Not sure what's going on there. I'm sorry I can't reply on that Talk page at the moment. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, those were the days.... John really had to look after his image. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
At least he didn't have to "fight to the death to save his political career" like some...(?)
- Every mornin' at the mine you could see him arrive
- He stood six-foot-six and weighed two-forty-five
- Kinda broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip
- And everybody knew ya didn't give no lip to big Dom
- (Big Dom, big Dom)
- Big bad Dom (big Dom)....[8]. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:01, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
History corner: them Royals what we 'ave loved... (gawd bless 'er, and all them wot sails in 'er)
- Miranada Richradson - childish, spoiled and silly, possessing a fiery temper.
- Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother - well-known horse racing fan and drinks sponsor.
- Queen Elizabeth 2 - retired British ocean liner converted into a floating hotel.
- Queenie Watts - star of TV series Stars and Garters and many British 1970s sex comedies.
- Camilla, Queen Consort - something rather novel.
G'night possums
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ec/Dame_Edna_at_the_royal_wedding_cropped.jpg/220px-Dame_Edna_at_the_royal_wedding_cropped.jpg)
"Tell me the story of that frock Judy, it's obviously an old favorite; you were wise to remove the curtain rings." Dame Edna Everage (1934-2023) Martinevans123 (talk) 08:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
- In the stillness of a church Where candles glow, In the softness of a fall Of fresh white snow, In the brightness of the stars That shine this night, In the calmness of a pool Of healing light, In the clearness of a choir That softly sings, In the oneness of a hush Of angels’ wings, In the mildness of a night By stable bare, In the quietness of a lull Near cradle fair, There’s a patience as we wait For a new morn, And the presence of a child Soon to be born.
Unhinged former Putin advisor Sergei Markov threatens nuclear war against the UK in the first 30 seconds of his Radio 4 interview.
And besides, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was just hiding in Finland.... so that proves everything!
An "act of terrorism" apparently. Meanwhile.... 9,000–16,502 Ukrainian civilians killed? Just bad luck, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:54, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
RIP Linda Lewis
Farewell Linda Ann Fredericks (27 September 1950 – 3 May 2023). This track was possibly even better than the original, from Woman Overboard (1977): just so beautiful.
- Slide guitar – Snowy White
- Acoustic guitars – Jim Cregan, Alun Davies
- Keyboards – Max Middleton
- Harmonica – Peter Hope Evans
- Background vocals – Anna Peacock, Linda Lewis
- Producer – Jim Cregan
Martinevans123 (talk) 07:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | |
my story today |
---|
- Thank you. And Gordon Lightfoot. - The Main page remembers Amoz Oz. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:29, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes. If you could read my mind, Gerda, What a tale my thoughts could tell. Just like an old time movie, 'Bout a ghost from a wishing well. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Fellas, it's too rough to feed ya. - Not enough references for the Main page, and I have no time - pleasant reason: tango. On the pic the conductor of Te Deum (music open at that page), with the conductor of the mass playing piano, the soprano, and the vacuum-cleaner. The choir from Belgium to come tomorrow - and my guests. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Looks like it will be amazing! And now I know where Zwijndrecht is. 😊 Martinevans123 (talk) 19:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- It was, and I had a good story on coronation day: the Te Deum we sang that day. And the following day we sang it for the composer ;) - And today we remember a composer who created music especially for us! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Could you find refs for Grace Bumbry? - they are marked as missing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Seems you have beaten me to it (very unsurprisingly)... An opera great and a pioneer of course. Surprised she is not on Main page already, as she was American, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- They are rather impartial. It needs refs and nothing but refs. I have Menahem Pressler there - met in the interview event mentioned which was a blessing - and one per day is enough ;) - Gordon Lightfoot didn't make it, and that's not because he's Canadian but because I was away ;) - Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Perhaps look for Leontyne Price already, because it's missing more refs than can be collected in a day or two. Refs while still alive - that would be something new. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Found one more, in German but see lead pic! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- For Price (not that one), it seems what Bing actually said in 1950 was, "I shall be happy to engage Negro singers, if I can find the right voice for the right part."[1] Martinevans123 (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Great, and has Bumbry also. Also found the review of our concert, pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Marvellous.
- Re "The production played in Pittsburgh, Chicago and Washington, D.C., and then toured Vienna, Berlin, London, and Paris, under the auspices of the U.S. State Department", I see there is this source for the London premier, on 9 October 1952, at Porgy and Bess:[2] But this source says: "It was during the memorable revival of Porgy and Bess that began in 1952 that critics and the public hailed the discovery of the finest of all its leading singers, Leontyne Price and William Warfield. Their consummate artistry and unerring musicality, which was capable of the entire range of operatic literature, endowed George Gershwin’s work with a new depth and beauty. It was as if Porgy and Bess were newly discovered. In the almost two years Miss Price remained with the company, she sang Bess in London, Paris, Berlin and Vienna as well as in New York. Mr. Warfield sang Porgy for seven months during that historic tour and returned to the role in the 1961 revival." Might be useful if it is considered strong enough? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Re marriage to William Warfield: "He sang opposite the soprano Leontyne Price, whom he married at the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York, with the whole cast of Porgy in attendance on the day before it set off for Europe." and " On August 30, 1952, exactly one day before the entire cast of Porgy and Bess left for a European tour, the couple married and held their wedding ceremony at the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York. The entire cast attended the ceremony.". So it was in fact the entire cast, not "many of the cast". Martinevans123 (talk) 08:17, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, - sadly still busy with people who died. May she live much longer! - more pleasant music (heard today!) if you click on songs - did you know a string quartet with two cellos (and no article yet in English? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I do now, thanks. Although I knew absolutely nothing about Anton Arensky before. So many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- ... and now May scenery pictured when you click on songs, - and great music staged that Handel didn't conceive as an opera, with the outstanding Paula! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. Opera with English words! yay!! Such a dramatic work. Here's the wonderful Joyce Di Donato with Les Arts Florissants (William Christie, 2014, Aix-en-Provence). Handy French subtitles! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- thank you! - more pics, also new memory and music, and ten years ago I had a DYK for my most serious article --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, Gerda. I'll try and find some more sources for Leontyne. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, - just two more died who come first. - Pentecost was full of music, and my story today is that 300 years ago today, Bach became Thomaskantor, with BWV 75, writing music history. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- I did one of those two, always hoping I'll get to using your sources! - Good news, and a first ever for us: our yt is out! - I mean 2 days ago, but I only put it on my talk, not going around advertising - 806 views when I looked last - will advertise tomorrow with the piece on the Main page again, choir pictured ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Now 807, lol. Looks amazing. But I need to dedicate the full 1:07. Are you easy to spot? Do you get a close up?! Martinevans123 (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- 816. I am often just above the conductor, because I'm on the right side, last row, not far from the lamp which shines on a woman next to my friend Maria (conductor's wife, soloist's mother, to the right the way you look), who's next to me (one more right). I haven't seen it all (but listened, yes), but doubt that the altos got any close-ups, saw only soprano and tenor. The sopranos watch the conductor better ;) - I tried to count altos from the right, but the camera rarely gets them all, and they are "packed". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ah ok, gotcha! (I think). An amazing piece of music. I'm sure the video will get many more views. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- 816. I am often just above the conductor, because I'm on the right side, last row, not far from the lamp which shines on a woman next to my friend Maria (conductor's wife, soloist's mother, to the right the way you look), who's next to me (one more right). I haven't seen it all (but listened, yes), but doubt that the altos got any close-ups, saw only soprano and tenor. The sopranos watch the conductor better ;) - I tried to count altos from the right, but the camera rarely gets them all, and they are "packed". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Now 807, lol. Looks amazing. But I need to dedicate the full 1:07. Are you easy to spot? Do you get a close up?! Martinevans123 (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, Gerda. I'll try and find some more sources for Leontyne. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- thank you! - more pics, also new memory and music, and ten years ago I had a DYK for my most serious article --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. Opera with English words! yay!! Such a dramatic work. Here's the wonderful Joyce Di Donato with Les Arts Florissants (William Christie, 2014, Aix-en-Provence). Handy French subtitles! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- ... and now May scenery pictured when you click on songs, - and great music staged that Handel didn't conceive as an opera, with the outstanding Paula! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I do now, thanks. Although I knew absolutely nothing about Anton Arensky before. So many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, - sadly still busy with people who died. May she live much longer! - more pleasant music (heard today!) if you click on songs - did you know a string quartet with two cellos (and no article yet in English? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Great, and has Bumbry also. Also found the review of our concert, pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- For Price (not that one), it seems what Bing actually said in 1950 was, "I shall be happy to engage Negro singers, if I can find the right voice for the right part."[1] Martinevans123 (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Seems you have beaten me to it (very unsurprisingly)... An opera great and a pioneer of course. Surprised she is not on Main page already, as she was American, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Looks like it will be amazing! And now I know where Zwijndrecht is. 😊 Martinevans123 (talk) 19:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Fellas, it's too rough to feed ya. - Not enough references for the Main page, and I have no time - pleasant reason: tango. On the pic the conductor of Te Deum (music open at that page), with the conductor of the mass playing piano, the soprano, and the vacuum-cleaner. The choir from Belgium to come tomorrow - and my guests. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes. If you could read my mind, Gerda, What a tale my thoughts could tell. Just like an old time movie, 'Bout a ghost from a wishing well. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
More Leontyne Price
- Re: "
Although many black newspapers criticized the export of Porgy and Bess as presenting a false and demeaning picture of black life...
" there's a whole paper by a David Monod in Journal of American Studies here, but it looks like my JSTOR access has now expired. - Re: "
In November 1954, Price made her formal recital debut at New York's Town Hall.
" There's an NYT source here. - Re: "
".. later NBC Opera broadcasts were boycotted by several NBC affiliates, most of them in the South, because of her race.
" There's a partial source here. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:55, 15 May 2023 (UTC) - Re: "
In Vienna, she made her first full opera recording for RCA, singing Donna Elvira in Mozart's Don Giovanni, conductd by Erich Leinsdorf.
" Partial source here. - Re: "
The next fall, she appeared as Leonora in Verdi's Il Trovatore in San Francisco, with the Swedish tenor Jussi Björling.
" Partial source here
Advice
If you are ever unblocked, it would be best for you to use my style of writing articles for yourself. Rule #1 of what I never do is use a single source as a template for writing articles. I always use two or more. When you do this, you can get information not explicitly stated in either article as long as you don't violate WP:SYNTHESIS or WP:OR. Rule #2 of what I never do is allow Earwig to mark anything down as a potential copyvio at all.
See what I did at Thanksgiving Day Disaster to see what I mean. I combined two sources to tell a story in my own words. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for that very useful advice, Scorpions13256. I've tried to find some sources for Gerda for existing material in the Leontyne Price article. But I have not suggested any textual changes or additions, because that's not one of the articles that's been reviewed in my CCI. Sometimes it's possible to find only a single source for a claim. Martinevans123 (talk) 06:37, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Grade II listed building in Gwynedd
Do you have any interest in helping to fill out Draft:Plas Dinas? (An IP on the talkpage of the Lord Snowdon article had me start it.) Also, are you any good at making infoboxes for listed buildings? Softlavender (talk) 07:10, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I forgot you were still blocked. What a sad state of affairs and waste of a good wiki editor. Softlavender (talk) 07:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Softlavender. Thanks for your message! Hope you are well. Yes, I think I would normally be able to add an infobox, just about. Someone else who might be able to help is KJP1, who is always excellent with that type of small property. I'm not sure any more that there are "good" editors or "bad" ones.... just blocked editors and unblocked ones. Alas I cannot be trusted to add an infobox to anything, in case I sneakily add some copyvio text.... It's all or nothing with the blocking policy, isn't it. Just to let you know... of the 1056 edits checked so far at the CCI, 289 have been claimed (or assumed) to be copyvios, which is 27%. But out of my edit total of 206,383 those 289 are just 0.14%. Not that anyone actually cares, of course. It seems that the checking of my edits at the CCI has now fallen to a rate of one a month. So at this rate the backlog will be cleared in the year 2311. Yay. [9]. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just to let you know that I'm still watching here. Those percentages are, in my opinion, thought provoking. Of course, we are all confident that you will still be young, spry, and handsome in 2311, but still. Maybe we who are watching here should begin, slowly and thoughtfully, to think about crafting an appeal. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:42, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- We all know how hopeless total edit count is. But CCI hits are equally blunt. Whether it's an entire article or just one sentence, it's still a copyvio, it's still a black mark. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- I've taken some time to think this over, and I came up with a suggestion. I'm starting from the basic fact that it is unrealistic for the community to expect you to wait until the CCI backlog is cleared, when the backlog is moving so slowly. What you could consider doing – only if you feel like it, and only with no requirement of you doing it any faster than you choose – is to use your talk page to start going through the CCI entries that have not yet been reviewed.
- What I'm thinking of is this. Look at the entries that nobody has gotten to yet. When you find ones where it's not clear to you what the problem is, just skip over those. But when you find one where you can actually see now what a good correction would be, write a version of that correction here on your talk page, and ping whatever editor worked on the CCI most closely to that, asking them to evaluate your suggestion. This could be a good way of racking up evidence of your good faith and of your improved understanding of the problem, while not being held hostage to the slowness of the backlog. Might be worth a try. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:56, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good idea. Meanwhile, your opinion on St Mary the Virgin, Hanbury above, would be much appreciated. Oh, and ... thanks for stoppin' by! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:01, 25 May 2023 (UTC) "Just what is true, what else can you do. Just follow the rules, Keep your eyes on the road that's ahead of you... "
- p.s. "... ping whatever editor worked on the CCI most closely to that"... alas, until an editor actually checks the addition, there isn't one. That's why I've been looking at edits that have already been checked. But thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:04, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well, what with WP:IAR, you don't have to hew too closely to "most closely". It could be someone who checked something about a related topic, or someone who recently responded to another ping from you. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- I had thought it might be useful to employ the approach of "The source said this... My original edit said this.... My new suggested edit says this..." But I see that Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources says this:
- Can I copy text into a user page or talk page in order to work on it?
- I had thought it might be useful to employ the approach of "The source said this... My original edit said this.... My new suggested edit says this..." But I see that Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources says this:
- Well, what with WP:IAR, you don't have to hew too closely to "most closely". It could be someone who checked something about a related topic, or someone who recently responded to another ping from you. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- p.s. "... ping whatever editor worked on the CCI most closely to that"... alas, until an editor actually checks the addition, there isn't one. That's why I've been looking at edits that have already been checked. But thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:04, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good idea. Meanwhile, your opinion on St Mary the Virgin, Hanbury above, would be much appreciated. Oh, and ... thanks for stoppin' by! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:01, 25 May 2023 (UTC) "Just what is true, what else can you do. Just follow the rules, Keep your eyes on the road that's ahead of you... "
- We all know how hopeless total edit count is. But CCI hits are equally blunt. Whether it's an entire article or just one sentence, it's still a copyvio, it's still a black mark. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just to let you know that I'm still watching here. Those percentages are, in my opinion, thought provoking. Of course, we are all confident that you will still be young, spry, and handsome in 2311, but still. Maybe we who are watching here should begin, slowly and thoughtfully, to think about crafting an appeal. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:42, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Softlavender. Thanks for your message! Hope you are well. Yes, I think I would normally be able to add an infobox, just about. Someone else who might be able to help is KJP1, who is always excellent with that type of small property. I'm not sure any more that there are "good" editors or "bad" ones.... just blocked editors and unblocked ones. Alas I cannot be trusted to add an infobox to anything, in case I sneakily add some copyvio text.... It's all or nothing with the blocking policy, isn't it. Just to let you know... of the 1056 edits checked so far at the CCI, 289 have been claimed (or assumed) to be copyvios, which is 27%. But out of my edit total of 206,383 those 289 are just 0.14%. Not that anyone actually cares, of course. It seems that the checking of my edits at the CCI has now fallen to a rate of one a month. So at this rate the backlog will be cleared in the year 2311. Yay. [9]. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2023 (UTC)