March music[edit]

story · music · places

in memory of the birthday of a friend who showed me art such as this - and of Vami --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... and the premiere of Nabucco --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rossini's Petite messe solennelle was premiered on 14 March 1864, - when I listen to the desolate Agnus Dei I think of Vami_IV. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vacation pics uploaded, at least the first day, - and Aribert Reimann remembered. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next day, around Porto da Cruz, on Bach's birthday. You may remember that I suggested to give him an infobox in 2013. That one still listed some "prominent" pieces. Later we found the better solution: link to the complete list of compositions, - it's more neutral, avoiding editorial preferences. - On that background: what do you think of Vivaldi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some days later, a calf in the mist and chocolate cake, and a story of collaboration - did you think about Vivaldi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I listen to Bach's St John Passion today, - 300 years after it was first performed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April music[edit]

I understand that you are busy, and Vivaldi can wait a bit longer, but we have the same situation now at Aaron Copland, with his Appalachian Spring going to by TFA in three days. The question is easy: does a list of compositions belong in the composer's infobox? I think yes (Bach, Mozart, Beethoven), and was reverted twice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My answer to the question is "whatever a consensus of editors decide is appropriate". This, even more than whether or not to have an infobox, is a content issue. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

You didn't look. They have an infobox, - that's not the question. The question is: does the list of compositions belong in the composer's infobox, and I rub my eyes how that can even be a question. What else could be more worthwhile to show? - As I write this I have two supporters against the lone reverts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understood the issue. This, even more than whether or not to have an infobox, is a content issue. where "this" means compositions in the infobox. Barkeep49 (talk) 20:28, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I really didn't know understand what "this" meant. Sorry, more sorry, but I don't agree even after understanding. See Vivaldi: it wasn't painted as "lets discuss if we have the works or not" but as "the link violates a guideline" (questioning at the same time all compromise versions, Bach etc.). A longish discussion resulted in "no, they don't". And now? My little brain has no room for any good reason not to point at a composer's works, sorry sorry, and a simple "ce" or "trim" for an edit summary doesn't enlighten me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I go to bed knowing that I have three supporters against the lone reverts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I woke up to see that she offered a new idea! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear that. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:26, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like to see Appalachian Spring on the Main page today (not by me, just interested and reviewed), and I also made it my story. - How do you like the statue (look up places)? I was undecided so show three versions ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today I see Marian Anderson as my top story (by NBC, 1939), and below three people with raised arms, - and the place is the cherry blossom in Frauenstein. - With the ballet, 10k+ readers saw the composer's and didn't complain ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marian Anderson - finally a musician you're posting about who I'm very familiar with. She was an amazing women and an incredibly talented performer. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! I saw the news item last year when it was posted on Easter Sunday - as had been in 1939 - but then was too busy to listen to the whole broadcast. I did today, and was quite impressed, especially by the last two spirituals which sound as if sung by different women. - I brought Jessye Norman to GA, a singer where an infobox was never a problem. The short question & answer for Anderson from 2020 is refreshing (still on the talk). Why a few other cases are so problematic I'll never understand. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

plum tree blossom for Kalevi Kiviniemi in the snow - see my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My story today is about a piece composed for the Second Sunday after Easter 300 years ago, and I just returned from a (long) opera about the same age, with soprano Pretty Yende --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

relief: the last of six RD articles in one week is now on the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox person on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Metallic means are precisely represented by primitive Pythagorean triples.

In a primitive Pythagorean triple, if the difference between hypotenuse and longer leg is 1, 2 or 8, such Pythagorean triple accurately represents one particular metallic mean. The cotangent of the quarter of smaller acute angle of such Pythagorean triangle equals the precise value of one particular metallic mean.

Consider a primitive Pythagorean triple (a,b,c) in which a < b < c and c - b ∈ {1, 2, 8}. Such Pythagorean triangle (a,b,c) yields the precise value of a particular metallic mean as follows :

where θ is the smaller acute angle of the Pythagorean triangle

and

For example, the primitive Pythagorean triple 20-21-29 incorporates the 5th metallic mean. Cotangent of the quarter of smaller acute angle of the 20-21-29 Pythagorean triangle yields the precise value of the 5th metallic mean. Similarly, the Pythagorean triangle 3-4-5 represents the 6th metallic mean. Likewise, the Pythagorean triple 12-35-37 gives the 12th metallic mean, the Pythagorean triple 52-165-173 yields the 13th metallic mean, and so on. ^[1] Wanderer909 (talk) 12:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you warn someone about outing. May I please email you about this issue? It is NOT about the question where I saw you warn them, but an entirely separate matter unrelated to that/those users. It's just that I saw you mention it and have something to ask you, please. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My email open. Barkeep49 (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just emailed you, thanks. DBaK (talk) 22:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Brothers of Italy on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I'm sure I've come across this before, but for the life of me I can't remember the correct procedure. DXYZ was changed into a dab page, but the editor cut and paste the article's content to DXYZ-AM. I reverted the dab conversion, but the article created by the cut and paste, what to do about that? The dab is the right move. Should I just do a dummy edit on the AM page, and give attribution? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969 so good to have you around my talk page again. The good new is nothing needs to be done. DXYZ-AM was properly attributed and is back to being a redirect so no further cleanup is needed. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me. Where is the attribution in Special:History/DXYZ-AM? Special:Diff/1218330866 has clues that a copy occurred, and Special:Diff/1218392470's edit summary links to DXYZ, but attribution is not stated clearly. Flatscan (talk) 04:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For me Article transferred to DXYZ-AM to distinguish Iligan-based DXYZ-FM is enough in the context of the diff to provide attribution @Flatscan given that transferred is a close enough synonym of copied. If your concern is that it doesn't say from where and if you want to null edit or talk page message to clear that up don't let me stop you. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so, following WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Repairing insufficient attribution (guideline, shortcut WP:RIA): dummy edit on the redirect and {{Copied}} tags on the talk pages of the source and the destination.

Three components were lacking:

1. That a copy occurred Savvy editors can identify the creation as a likely copy, but an inexperienced reader may not see it as clearly.
2. Link to the source DXYZ-FM was linked in the creation edit summary, but the source was actually DXYZ (cross-page diff). The redirect edit links DXYZ, but it does not mention the copy.
3. Mention of "history" and "attribution" Most of WP:CWW's suggested edit summaries include this pointer to guide readers to the correct page's history.

Flatscan (talk) 04:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:

• Sammi Brie (submissions) with 642 points, mostly from 11 GAs about radio and television;
• voorts (submissions) with 530 points, mostly from two FAs (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three GAs;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 523 points, mostly from 11 GAs about coinage and history;
• SounderBruce (submissions) with 497 points, mostly from a FA about the 2020 season of the soccer club Seattle Sounders FC and two GAs;
• Tamzin (submissions) with 410 points, mostly from a FA about the drink Capri-Sun and three GAs;
• Kusma (submissions) with 330 points, mostly from a FA about the English botanist Anna Blackburne and a GA.

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I just saw that in the Venezuela discussion you proposed GS applying arbcom-like restrictions to noticeboards. Mind elaborating further on what your idea is and why it would improve things?

Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RadioactiveBoulevardier I wonder if the community would want to pass a general sanction to allow uninvolved administrators to impose word limits on involved parties at notice boards and, as a separate but complementary idea, to require involved parties to participate in certain sections. I genuinely don't know - there's a good chance the answer is no - but it's possible there's support for something like that. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this comment: perhaps you might be willing to provide a bigger hint on what rule you feel is being ignored? I understand of course if it involves a private discussion or if you just don't want to go into further detail. isaacl (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. I have edited my comment. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit and subsequent comment. isaacl (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]