December songs

3 of them

I know I shouldn't change your red links because you plan, but we need this today, so I changed to ill: Fritz Reuter [de]. I missed when you created his student Hella Brock, and now she died at age 101, - thank you for having done it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do I undestand you need Fritz Reuter be available today ? LouisAlain (talk) 12:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I tried to explain that we needed the ill today, because more people will look her up, and her teacher who had just a red link. Needless to say, the Reuter article would be even better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The >55.ko Fritz Reuter looks like a challenge so I've added it on my "to-do" list. No idea when it will be delivered though. I'm afraid I won't live long enough to translate the whole German wikipedia into English then into French. LouisAlain (talk) 14:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha! Grimes2 (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I say Reuter, I mean a translation of the 5 key facts, - explained before. I nominated Brock to In the news. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is Fritz Reuter [nl]? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the new saphire. Your pace exceeds my abilities to create so many articles. I'll have a go at de:Rosl Zapf and then Fritz Reuter (componist). But this latter one is so large (even bigger than Max Strub) that I'll first give an abridged version of it, and will complete the translation in the future like I did for Harry Goldschmidt which still needs polishing. LouisAlain (talk) 10:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for Zapf, - to be my 300th woman bio since Women in red was created! As said before: Just translate the much shorter Dutch Reuter, - that should be all we need for the moment. - Can't help that people die, and then red links become visible ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong, and #300 is Jutta Lampe, on the Main page now, with de:Eduard Marks a red link. That's short and sweet, especially if you drop works. I'd do it myself but am rather busy with Beethoven. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

nl:Ria Bollen? - stub would be enough--Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)  Done[reply]

Thank you, will look. Thank you so much for having started Marjon Lambriks, - look! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And to think this page was meant to be deleted 42 minutes after it was on the main... Mit der Deutsche Mannschaft hinter mir, bin ich sicher, dass meine dürftigen Übersetzungen zu den besten der en Wiki gehören. Congrats for this new DYK. LouisAlain (talk) 20:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't say "dürftig", - German is a tough language, and your translations from German are much better than mine from French would be. Bruno Chevillon? - who's also there in German, but I have no time, working on the trombonist draft, to clean up before the New Year. Teamwork is it, and nationality doesn't matter! Good to have you here!! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have a good new year 2021! This is to many more articles together, and if it means fighting deletion or draft space, we'll do that also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your wishes dear Gerda and also thanks for being so supportive of my work here. Needless to say I also wish you the best during this new rotation of Earth around our star. It is just flabbergasting to consider the amount of pages you create (like your collection of pictures for example and so many more pages with Tafeln and their likes). Your TP is like a website of its own and reminds of a blog.
The program for this new year includes de:Gustav Flügel (no less) and Fritz Reuter (componist) (a promise I must keep). Also I have already added the "Category Hochschule für Musik "Hanns Eisler" faculty" to about 40 articles to which it belonged and intend to create the 71 ones remaining in German.
There are also so many categories which should be created with thousand names involved... LouisAlain (talk) 15:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you (place remembered pictured on my talk for two more hours), and plenty of red links, such as his wife. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with Siegfried Pank today (or it would be too late. Just a sample (and now idea why the German article missed so many links): "As a Gewandhaus musician, he was intensively involved with the viola da gamba at the suggestion of Wieland Kuijken and Jordi Savall. Since then, he has stood for a gamba playing that comes close to the baroque ideal."

• What is described is extra, NOT Gewandhaus.
• "intensively involved" hurts
• viola da gamba is viol in English, never "gamba" alone, - yes, we Germans say Gambe
• "Since then, he has stood for" - why so much pathos I wonder
• "baroque ideal" - and what would that be???

I suggest that next time you come across such purple language you comment out the sentence. I can always bring it back then if for a change it adds to a bio. My take on this one: Wieland Kuijken and Jordi Savall pointed him at playing the viol in historically informed performance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since you dislike laundry lists, would translating de:Georg-Philipp-Telemann-Preis der Landeshauptstadt Magdeburg a good idea ? And other similar pages ? LouisAlain (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like that prize translated, but "laundry list" means a list of "prestigious" conductors, halls, orchestras with NO context, NO music, - just names-dropping, and modern bios are full of it. Good old Kutsch-Riemens avoids that! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can use Citer (https://citer.toolforge.org/) to transform bare url-refs to complete cite templates. This is better than your method. Grimes2 (talk) 09:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip and sorry for not answering sooner: My daily nap called me. I now have to figure out what this tip is all about. 5,000 articles so far and never met that template. Ce n'est pas gagné ! (ask Gerda) LouisAlain (talk) 14:25, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Beethoven in 1803

Thank you so much for beginning the two, part of the the birthday display! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:48, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and keep up the good work! Grimes2 (talk) 09:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your wishes Grimes2, I gladly whish you the same. And thanks also for your daily help. LouisAlain (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LouisAlain! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

• Thanks to you CAPTAIN RAJU for these unexpected wishes. They make users feel less anonymous in the project. I appreciate. LouisAlain (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January songs

Did you see that a Magnificat began the new year? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:22, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are an honorary member of WP:QAI for exquisite prolific translations of biographies from French and German! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your new year gift Gerda, although some people (see below) seem not to partake your friendly opinion... LouisAlain (talk) 09:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

keep calm and carry on ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Herbert Kaliga has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have removed the previous post about this[1]: while you have every right to remove posts from your talk page, that doesn't mean that you can simply ignore the message and continue with such problematic editing.

You just created David Hermann Engel. That page has 4 references, but none of them actually reference the part of the text they are supposed to verify.

• "Born in Neuruppin, after his first organ lessons with Friedrich Wilke in Neu-Ruppin, Engel studied with Friedrich Schneider in Dessau and Adolf Friedrich Hesse in Breslau" is sourced to [2], which contains not a single thing relevant for this sentence. Even the more general page about Engel at that website[3] isn't useful for this.

• "In 1848, Engel was elected organist at the Merseburg Cathedral." is sourced to [4], which is a wiki (so shouldn't be used anyway), but worse again doesn't verify anything in that sentence (nor the preceding sentences).

• "Engel is considered the "discoverer" and patron of the organ builder Friedrich Ladegast." sourced to [5] which yet again has not a single thing even remotely related to this information.

The fourth source at least has something vaguely resembling what you wrote, although it isn't sufficient by far to verify it.

If you continue with this type of referencing, I will raise this issue at the admin noticeboard. People randomly adding references is much worse than people not adding references at all, as it falsely gives the impression that the information is verifiable and verified in the sources given; finding that this isn't true erodes the trust in all articles. Fram (talk) 14:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fram, you are too fast. Give me the chance to add or correct sources. LouisAlain, please add next time the "under construction" template, to indicate, that the article is not ready and finished. Grimes2 (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Grimes2. I'll look next week, - booked until then. - Articles translated from German typically have book sources without inline citations. It's always a tricky task to find something online, and the older the subject, the more difficult. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda and Grimes for your interventions. I leave Fritz Reuter (composer) as it is and forget de:Gustav Flügel (Komponist). Why should I spend hours working on long articles only to be encouraged the way I am by someone who already blocked me twice ? An adds thinly veiled threats to his comments : "If you continue with this type of referencing, I will raise this issue at the admin noticeboard". I know all too well how this will end, I've been here before. LouisAlain (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flügel, however, comes with plenty of refs, - different story. - Busy with Leon Rains, which is in the middle, some refs were there, others added by Grimes2, some to be found, - will add a review next. Please, all, help rephrase as much as you can, because one of the "sources" used the same translator, sigh, and the English result is dubious. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ps: Engles has 7 refs now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Engel article is complete and ready. Grimes2 (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grimes2, adding the "under construction" tag doesn't mean that people can add sources wherever they like, without regard for what they actually are used for, or (as in my previous report here) which aren't even about the same person, just someone with the same name. If LouisAlain wants to add sources but doesn't know where, he should put them on the talk page or at worst in the external links section, but not as references at random places in the article. Even better would be if they created their articles in draft space, as has been suggested many times by different people here. That others clean up his mess doesn't mean that his mess is acceptable. Fram (talk) 08:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See for example Oswald Lorenz, where "Schumann dedicated the song cycle Frauen-Liebe und Leben to Lorenz - probably also in allusion to the fact that Oswald remained unmarried his entire life." is sourced to this, which has no relevant information about this at all. It's nice that people clean up some of their articles, but enough issues caused by LouisAlain's editing habits remain in the articles. Hans Bund has only one reference, to Allmusic and again nothing in the text preceding that source is verified by that reference. This is just not an acceptable way of sourcing articles.

(edit conflict, so no answer to the last comment:) Can we agree that it is better to not add refs than some that don't support a fact? Agree that it may be difficult to tell for someone who is not a native speaker? Agree that finding a ref might be better than complaining? Agree that we heard so many complaints about refs missing that adding a remotely related ref or two might help prevent moving an article to draft, an article which is connected by working links that would be broken? Agree that links to a new article might raise the attention of others who may know where to find refs better than some secluded draft space? - I at least notice (most) articles by LouisAlain by links appearing on my watchlist.

LouisAlain, how many of "our" articles appeared on DYK in 2020 for Germany alone? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good opportunity to learn, Gerda Arendt. So far I have no idea. 68. LouisAlain (talk) 09:55, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yes, and 54 in 2019. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now to Lorenz who escaped my attention so far. The sentence about the allusion at being a bachelor is completely unneccessary, - the dedication alone would be better than an added assumption, with ref or without. LouisAlain, feel free to rather trim such stuff than trying to find a ref. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• http://nisc.com/ripm/volume_description/NZM.htm
• https://www.schumann-zwickau.de/media/archiv-sonderausstellungen/2009_Robert_Schumann_als_Redakteur_und_Musikschriftsteller.pdf
• https://brahmsinstitut.de/Archiv/web/bihl_digital/schumann_drucke_units/schum_op_042.html

Off to my own plans for today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fram, der Geist der stets verneint.

First of all, my references aren't fake but misplaced, I admit that.

Wikipedia is a collective encyclopedia. Which part of this sentence don't you understand  ?

You seem to have an axe to grind with someone in your life and I happen to be the lucky recipient of your existential unsatisfaction.

There are dozens if not hundreds of thousands horrors and abominations in the main but apparently you disregard them in order to focus on my output only. Thanks for the attention which is also an admission that not one reviewer does their job proprely since more than 3000 articles have been submitted to their critic and, save for the ref. issue, all have been validated.

What do you expect ? An article like Hans-Joachim Griephan be perfect in the first shot ?

You use the word "mess" to qualify my work. And yet I assure you I'm potty trained by now.

'nuf said, I've alreday wasted too much time answering your regular complains. If you have so much time on your hands, have a look at Max Strub and you'll find plainty of reasons to vent you frustration. LouisAlain (talk) 09:55, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from personal attacks. And "mess" is not the same as "shit". Your claim about the reviewers is obviously false, as many of your articles have been draftified, even recently[6]. A reference which doesn't actually reference the sentence or paragraph it is attached to is a fake reference (it may be a valid "source" in general, although even this is not always the case, but it is not an actual reference where you use it). That you can translate articles which are already well-referenced, like "Max Strub" seems to be, is nice, but doing good work in some or even many cases doesn't mean that you can continue with problematic edits otherwise. That Wikipedia is a collective encyclopedia doesn't mean that it is okay to continuously make such errors because someone, some day, may correct them.

Is there a reason that you can't simply put these references in the external links section (or on the talk page) instead? If you don't know where they belong, don't put them somewhere randomly, but place them separately. Of course, this raises the question whether you actually verify anything you write, or simply translate it and hope that the original German text is correct? Fram (talk) 10:25, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just a language quation: "fake" as in "fake news" means to me that it is placed with the intention to lie, - if directed at me I'd feel attacked. I never thought "mess", always "work in progress". How about assuming good faith, both? How about removing all personal things from the above, and answer where we can agree? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deliberately placing references at places where they don't reference anything at all is faking references Doing this over and over again is creating a mess. Simple solutions have been presented, and in return I get personal attacks. I don't attack LouisAlain as a person, I attack his editing habits. He may feel attacked by this, but it doesn't give him the right to compare me with Mephistopheles or to comment on my "existential unsatisfaction". He can resolve this issue very easily, by changing his editing habits. When I go back 500 creations, I come across Alexander Molzahn. Forgetting the surname in the lead is a simple error, the kind of thing that can happen and which is no problem. Sourcing the sentence "Molzahn died in Frankfurt at the age of 91." to this, which lists him as "(1907-)" without indicating a year or place of death at all, is a problem, as it is the same thing which has happened for months and months across many articles, some of which get cleaned up by you or Grimes, but some of which don't. Fram (talk) 11:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find sources for Alexander Molzahn. He seems to be not notable for English Wikipedia. I propose deletion. Sorry LouisAlain. Grimes2 (talk) 11:42, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Bundesarchiv ref is fine for many facts (just not for a date of death), so is the article in the FAZ for his 90th birthday when he was a good interview partner. Use both more! He had students of international fame. I added one ref for teaching at Dr. Hoch's. No point deleting just because we don't know when exactly he died. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:18, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda, Grimes2, all I try to achieve is that LouisAlain stops making edits like this one from just now, where the source doesn't even work (and probably wouldn't verify the content, as Worldcat rarely contains such information). Fram (talk) 12:47, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]