Kleinzach 14:17, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say that i have checked and corrected the alphabetical order of titles for each composer on the opera list - I have also corrected the Massenet titles. Hope that's all OK!

Kleinzach 22:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly is. --GuillaumeTell 22:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to see that you've added the Grand in Leeds. I was there a couple of years ago for a Janecek opera with friends from Cumbria. Not only was it a wondeful theatre, but the drive over was gorgeous. Looking forward to its refurbishment. Vivaverdi 17:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words. Though I may not be an opera fan (rock opera is closer to my sort of thing!) I do visit the grand for plays and the odd christmas panto. My mother is a huge fan of the Grand as it supplies her with opera and ballet, her two favourite performance arts.

Luke C 20:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It was a tiny dash that was causing the problem. Easily fixed once I saw it. Cheers JackofOz 11:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help and clarification. Burdettekevin 3:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Guillaume. About your comment on my talk page: I agree, Beatrice etc. in that "see also" section do look a bit odd. While I was editing the York article earlier I did momentarily think that, but I couldn't immediately think what to do about them.

Maybe the answer is putting the princesses in the "Notable people from York" section and renaming it "Notable people associated with York". Also, the York Student Television link looks a bit too weak to be there, but then I haven't a clue as I have little understanding of York. (I'm not even sure why I've got it in my watchlist!)

The Blue Bell pub: I was almost going to cut that out, but a quick Google seemed to indicate it's fairly notable. Have one on me. Cheers, --A bit iffy 00:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that any group of people here could do something as reasonable as remove spoiler warnings from seventeenth century plots. Don't speak of it too loudly or the rabble will rebel. - Nunh-huh 19:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC) {{spoiler}} P.S. Lady Macbeth dies, and you'll still enjoy the brindisi. - Nunh-huh 19:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jambo, Bwana

Google reveals that there are c98,200 uses of "attractive" in Wikipedia, though, to be fair, most of those seem to be factual. Would "unusual" pass muster? I'll be going back with a pen and paper to make a note of the name of the deceased and might take a photo - the seat is a single sheet of metal with various words cut out of it here and there. Quite touching, actually. Perhaps I should snap the cows as well.

Kwa heri. --GuillaumeTell 22:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sijambo! I'm sure "unusual" would work. It would be good to get some photos of the Strays in, too. — Matt Crypto 18:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your note. As you will have seen I attempted to deal with the problem caused by this user (who also changed the title of the Opera Corpus etc). I tried to revert the Janacek opera, start a Fibich Šárka stub, as well as a disambiguation page (after seeing your note suggesting this).

I didn't make a very good job of this but everything you suggest sounds good. (This is more your field than mine.)

In theory, if we agree that the Fibich is the major opera, his work should be Šárka (opera), while the Janacek stays as Šárka (Janacek). (Grove only gives a separate article to the Fibich.) Unfortunately Šárka (opera) now points at the disambiguation page. Let me know if you need my help fixing this. If not I will leave it to you to sort out.

Kleinzach 19:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed in toto. The Orfeo (opera)/Orfeo (Corelli) distinction was inferred from past practice, but it hardly matters. Whatever you do with the Šárka (opera) page is fine by me. These pages are not normally redirects but I don't think that matters. (This is nothing compared to the time-wasting, nit-picking criticism on the Opera Corpus Talk page.)

Nevertheless we are now very close to finishing the composers stubs which is a big achievement!

Kleinzach 00:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting problem. If someone is born in Hungary, he has the right to regard himself as Hungarian in some sense - to say otherwise is racist. Of course, he may choose not to regard himself as Hungarian. - Runcorn 22:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Kiss Me Kate Norrland Opera Elmer Rice Luisa Miller The Grand Duke Jeffrey Black Sopranist The Cunning Little Vixen Oper Leipzig Malmö Opera and Music Theatre Opera North (U.S.) The Makropulos Affair La Cenerentola Manitoba Opera Mathis der Maler (opera) Vienna Volksoper Opera Comique Rap opera Frank Wildhorn

Cleanup The Swing Mikado List of fictional musical works The Barber of Seville Merge Opera buffa Rivers Cuomo Madame Emma Albani Add Sources Noel Gay Modest Mussorgsky Head register Wikify Mado Robin Jason Barry-Smith Madison Opera Expand Pietro Mascagni Ottawa International Animation Festival The King and I

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about my rather rushed contribution to the "list of operas" talk page; I was under time pressure when I wrote it. Thank you for troubling to add your advice. Perhaps the two Mozarts should not be included, by I do think that the two Brittens should stay put (particularly A Midsummer Night's Dream; I think that Glyndebourne are doing it again this summer). Best Wishes.Moreschi 20:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just a quick word to commend your efforts - keep up the good work tidying and correcting the Wiki! I seem to encounter your edits all over the place! I noticed that some of your edits are purely to avoid redirects, and wondered if it might free up some of your time to do more substantial tidying (as well as being more server-friendly) if you were to take a look at Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken? Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 15:17, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes - a double redirect is a redirect that redirects to a redirect. As I'm sure you know, they do need fixing, because the wiki software can't currently follow them! But a single redirect is cheap. It's probably not too productive to worry about double redirects; the best way to do them is just check Special:DoubleRedirects which is updated occasionally - and when I looked just now there were only two (both of them now fixed)! And on the subject of TIFH, yes, I think anything by such a fine literary figure as Frank Muir qualifies as literature (for want of a better categorisation): I personally rate Muir-And-Norden on the same sort of level as Douglas Adams (perhaps not quite as highly), and the Hitch Hikers' Guide canon would definitely qualify! Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 16:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of the convention of not including spoiler warnings on opera pages - I have now removed it from The Handmaid's Tale. Would be glad to help with the Opera Project, particularly in filling in the red links in the opera corpus, probably mostly 20th Century stuff in my case.

One thought, do we need an opera infobox including say, title, composer, first performance, principal characters, language, etc.? Gerry Lynch 10:50, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to correct me in anything - I saw the page on watch, though that it is about the novel and added it (the novels are much more known in the Czech Republic, due to being mandatory reading of the schoolkids). Pavel Vozenilek 18:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for weighing in on the opera/rock opera issue. I believe that Mr. Kleinzach's new definition of opera is too narrow, and I prefer the one that you posted on the talk page yesterday. The average age of the audience at the Met is 60 now, and I agree that, regardless of "traditional" notions of opera, as expressed in Grove, we need to be open to works that are written in the structure of an opera, even if modern instruments and technologies are used. If we accept ballad opera and other forms of folk opera as "opera", then I don't see how we can exclude rock opera. There appears to be a substantial body of works that can be called rock operas, even though it is difficult to draw the line between the more "operatic" rock operas from the rock "musicals". For instance, I would not include "Cats", because it does not tell a dramatic story, and I would not include Hair, because the book and lyrics are probably more important than the music (the same reason, really, that My Fair Lady is not an opera). Regards, --Ssilvers 15:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed you re-opened this AfD page. Generally, you don't want to ever open the same AfD page again, as the tag says, do not modify the debate after it has been closed. If a page has been re-created after one AfD, and feel the first debate was valid, simply tag the page with {{db-repost}} and an administrator will delete the article for you. If for some reason, you want to create a new/2nd debate at AfD, just make a new debate page, normally something like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conscientiology2. I have tagged the article in question for speedy deletion, please let me know if you have any other questions. --Hetar 17:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:). I needed that. Mak (talk) 17:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry then for messing it up. I will follow your advice. Many thanks for letting me know. Mel Romero 01:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have put this up for deletion, see Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 21. Best, - Kleinzach 19:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No point at all. I just didn't see the one at top - now rectified. —Whouk (talk) 10:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I plead dyslexia, or something. I really thought when I was looking at the diff that stats for a period ending in March had been replaced with stats for a period ending in January. In fact the opposite is true. I have no idea how I made the error. Mea culpa! Please revert back if you haven't already ... --Jfruh (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I put up a page for Raimondi, but I'm not very good with the Cat and reference stuff. Can you take a look please? Thanks! Ssilvers 06:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: I found a birthdate that wasn't the same as the one you had - where did you get it? -- Just from a web link, so I am sure the ODO is better, thanks for fixing it. Also, I am sure you are right about the Count. He may have sung Figaro, but if he recorded the Count twice and ODO mentions it, he is certainly better known for that role. Thanks for cleaning up the links. -- Ssilvers 13:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good advice. I feel much better about the Neil Shicoff entry now. In fact, I daresay it's pretty good. Looking forward to any help re: Joseph Volpe (opera) and Stefan Zucker. -- Ssilvers 01:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you edited the intro but, dare I say, it still reads a bit oddly:

An opera house is a building where operas are performed. The venues are usually constructed specifically with opera in mind, although other performing arts may be performed there. It should be noted that not all buildings whose name includes the words Opera House are opera houses for the purpose of this article.

Is it just a matter of moving the 'not' in the last sentence or is there a better way of clarifying what needs to be said? Regards. - Kleinzach 10:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I didn't simply alter it is that although It should be noted that all buildings whose name includes the words Opera House are not [necessarily?] opera houses for the purpose of this article. seems more grammatical, I don't really know what it means. What are the 'the purposes of this article'? Maybe it would be better to delete the sentence altogether? Perhaps you have a better idea. - Kleinzach 06:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

When a redirect doesn't fall under a criteria for speedy deletion (and this one doesn't), the place to take it is Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion. First, though, my question is: Why? Redirects are good things -- they provide not merely in-text links, but also help filter search terms, and often maintain GFDL attribution history post-merger. I don't see a good reason to delete this one, as it is a reasonable search term. Talk pages are not independently deleted, normally, unless they contain patent nonsense or vandalism only. If RfD decided to delete the redirect for some reason, the talk page would be speedied automatically. Talk pages of redirects are maintained for the same reason the redirects are maintained themselves; they provide a full record of past editorial choices involved the topic in question.

Whew... I don't blame you for being confused by that. I think I just managed to confuse myself! :) Best wishes, Xoloz 00:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I simply must express my gratitude for your help over at Pie Jesu. :) You've helped to establish the connection between the different versions, given an origin for the poor thing at last (that was incredibly hard to find on my part, not least because, well, I never did find it, so I can't begin to tell you how happy I am that you could add it!), and clarified which versions were on Aled and Voice of an Angel, and even added more composers who had used a version of it in their Reqiuems! My God, do you realize how much better and more informative this page is now?? :D Thank you! Runa27 23:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Guillaume, you did a tremendous job translating and extending my german stub, many thanks ! Now, if you could translate de:Otakar Kraus, about his teacher, this would be really swelll. Kraus was, in many ways, one of the most curiuos figures of his times : an unauspicuous exile Czech barytone who became a figure of modern music and the teacher of a whole generation of british bassos : Lloyd, Tomlinson, White, Howell and so on. There are several links provided. Thanks again ! By the way, there used to be an article on Willard White, but it has been deleted due to copyvio... Cheers, RCS 07:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, i didn't know. I don't like White so much either (maybe because of the affirmative-action-attitude i feel behind some of the hype he gets), but nobody on en:wiki cared about recreating an article on him after the former one got deleted, and this is not just. On the other hand, de:Willard White, which i wrote, is all a german audience needs to know... If you liked Kraus as Klingsor, what did you think of de:Zoltán Kelemen in the same part ? All the best, RCS 11:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Guillaume, thanks for your dedicated work ! What do you think of Aage Haugland by the way, he sang a lot in London so you must have seen him onstage (assuming you are from London or have been there). Cheers, RCS 07:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got to thinking about your old comment on the musicals project that there needed to be more discussion of the Victorian and Edwardian British musicals, and so I started doing some research and beefed up the flagship article's early sections. Then, one thing led to another, and before you know it, I had created or expanded articles for composers such as Lionel Monckton, Ivan Caryll, Edward Solomon, Sidney Jones, Frank Osmond Carr, Alfred Cellier, Paul Rubens (composer) and their lyricists and other collaborators (like Harry Greenbank, Percy Greenbank, Owen Hall, Basil Hood, Adrian Ross, B. C. Stephenson, Oscar Asche, and Henry Pottinger Stephens), as well as managers, like George Edwardes, Seymour Hicks, Robert Evett, Charles Frohman and George Grossmith, Jr. and performers like Lily Elsie, Marie Tempest, Gertie Millar, Ellaline Terriss, Harry Grattan and C. Hayden Coffin, etc. Also see Gaiety Theatre, London, Daly's Theatre and German Reed Entertainment.

I also created a lot of Victorian and Edwardian musicals' stubs. Some of them are: Morocco Bound, Go Bang, The Shop Girl, The French Maid, An Artist's Model, The Circus Girl, A Runaway Girl, The Messenger Boy, The Toreador, A Country Girl, Quality Street (play) (1902), The Orchid (1903), The Earl and the Girl (1903), The Cingalee, The Catch of the Season (1904) The Girls of Gottenberg (1907), The Arcadians (musical), The Quaker Girl, Doris (opera), The Red Hussar, The Girl in the Train (1910), The Balkan Princess (1910), The Happy Day (1916) and The Boy (musical). Also operettas that played in English in London: The Dollar Princess (1909), The Count of Luxembourg (1911), A Waltz Dream (1911), and Lilac Time (1922).

Finally, I expanded some stubs: The Nautch Girl (1891), The Vicar of Bray, A Gaiety Girl, The Geisha, Dorothy (opera), San Toy, Florodora, A Chinese Honeymoon, Our Miss Gibbs, Chu Chin Chow, The Maid of the Mountains, The Chocolate Soldier, Florodora, and A Greek Slave.

Anyhow, if you are interested, please take a look. I hope this goes some way towards solving the "US-centric" problem. --Ssilvers 01:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the list of shows in Category:British musicals you'll see even more. Buxton was really fun. I hope you enjoyed all your summer Operas! -- Ssilvers 19:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is now an article or stub about every British musical that ran for at least 400 performances (prior to about 1920)[1]. It's been interesting finding out about them. I think my article on George Edwardes is in pretty good shape, but the article on Charles Frohman is not very good. If you have time, please see if you can take any of the articles farther. Regards, -- Ssilvers 18:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with everything you said on the Opera talk page. It seems like you are in as good a position as anyone to write it. Sullivan has a pretty good article, and the Gilbert and Sullivan article should also be helpful. If you have any questions about Sullivan, let me know. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 18:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My logic is as follows:

1. People looking for Gilbert and Sullivan will probably start at Gilbert first. A redirect there is helpful, however, "See Arthur Sullivan" ignores all the other work he does.
2. Gilbert is far more famous than any other operatic lyricist, and the only one, to my knowledge, routinely named with the composer.
3. The redirect to Sullivan means we need to be clear what Sullivan did with Gilbert, and what with others. Furthermore, "Gilbert and Sullivan" works are notable in their own right, above the rest of Sullivan's works. I am not aware of any other composer for which this holds true.

Quite simply, Gilbert seems to me a special case. Vanished user ^talk 20:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I may be too close to the subject: I've worked on several of the Gilbert operas - hell, my pet project at the moment is collecting up the hundreds of little articles he wrote for magazines during his early career - and have long been part of a push for The Mountebanks, Princess Toto, and the like to be performed more often (Mountebanks is occassionally, Toto largely in concerts). I'd be uncomfortable with a simple "See Sullivan" for Gilbert himself, but I could live with it for "Gilbert and Sullivan". That said, you'll note almost all the operas I mentioned do have Wikipedia links. Vanished user ^talk 21:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Noticed your recent interest in linking Wilton's Music Hall; the last time I checked this was a 'special page' due to its participation in a BBC TV programme, and so could not be created.

I had the idea to create one sometime ago, having an interest in surviving music halls, and having visited Wilton's some time ago. Please let me know if you're planning an article, or if this is now unblocked, I should just go ahead ...

All the best Kbthompson 23:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gilbert was obsessed with Elixir. Besides Dulcamara (1866), he wrote a short story called "An Elixir of Love" (1876). He renewed the theme in The Sorcerer and The Mountebanks, and he continually tried to get Sullivan to write yet another opera on the theme of a magic potion. I read somewhere that he translated the opera into English, but I can't remember where, just now. But I like your edit about "travestied" best. Thanks for reworking the patter song article. I think it is much better now. The only thing I am thinking ought to be done further is to add a more modern example to the "musicals" section at the end, but I'm not sure what the best example is from the past couple of decades. I can't remember if there's one in Rent or Wicked or one of the newer ones. I think there's one in Blood Brothers. -- Ssilvers 01:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I disagree fundamentally with your last edit, as it implies that the ones that Grossmith sang were the second kind rather than the first kind, but he sang them all. Also, there are more of the first kind than the second kind. After I thought about it, it became clear that the best way to fix it was to combine the two sections. There's no real reason to separate them. See my lists on the patter song talk page from a couple of days ago of which is which. -- Ssilvers 21:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and greetings! Hope you are well etc. This is just to say that the list of operettas is now transferred to The opera corpus (though not yet to the Opera Work List). This mean we now have some red link composers again. Maybe not a major problem. . . . Best. - Kleinzach 20:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My copy says "First paperback edition" (1997). Cheers. --Folantin 20:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeomen of the Guard, Covent Garden, ENO, 1995. Sullivan was also an organist there. Vienna: I can't find my stedman just now, but she lists contemporaneous performances of most of Sullivan's operas in German at various opera houses. It might be I got the specific one mixed up, but certainly it was at some of the major German opera houses —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vanished user (talk • contribs) 22:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

You said Covent Garden, old chap. Not the Royal Opera Company. And is, then, any company that performs G&S by definition not a major opera company, then? Vanished user ^talk 22:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, an d I apologise. But the sheer frequency of G&S productions outside of these, let's face it, geographically isolated opera houses surely means something. (The fact that New York has a professional company devoted solely to G&S and London did until very recently might also explain something - Particularly London, as when the D'Oyly Carte was performing G&S year round almost every night, it would have been somewhat unlikely that another London production of G&S would have been as profitable as something else that hadn't already flooded the market.) Vanished user ^talk 18:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm tired and grumpy from flu, so I'm going to back off for the night as you deserve civility. I'll look at your message in the morning. Cheers. Vanished user ^talk 23:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some code you can maybe adapt:

Opera Template
A • B • C

Kleinzach 00:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Mitridate, re di Ponto looks good but I think it might be better to have the titles as a block. (At the moment there seem to be four separate lines.) The Mitridate looks better than the Il re pastore side box which looks too wide IMO. These are obviously much more difficult to do than ones at the bottom. - Kleinzach 12:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree top right is better, all things being equal. If you like I can try to amend the code to reduce the white space. One further suggestion: how about making the list chronological rather than alphabetic? - Kleinzach 17:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed La finta semplice. Re the Mozart box, I was wondering if you were going to put dates for the operas. I'd prefer it myself but perhaps you think that would be too much information? - Kleinzach 19:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Maybe the basic design is OK now? I'd prefer the first word 'Operas' unlinked but that's minor. Adding the missing work would be good. After it's rolled out, it might be worth adding it to the project page as a model. - Kleinzach 21:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the infobox shd ideally go in the same position for all the articles. So in the case of The Magic Flute maybe the illustration can go in the roles section? I'd also be inclined to put the infobox in the stubs. At least that would mean the job was finished and if the stubs looked thin then it would be all the more of an incentive to write them up. Incidentally I have been thinking - after seeing how poor a lot of the Mozart material is - of putting him up for composer of the month in March. - Kleinzach 18:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think the infobox to Die Schuldigkeit des ersten Gebotes looks fine and I have de-linked both "Operas" and "WAM" in the title-bar as you are happy with this. The only point where we may not be in agreement is about 'adoption' of articles. I don't think we have the necessary 'cadre' of skilled writers for this to work. The adopters will expect to be able to write without interference and I think this will lead to variable standards. Actually I am not sure whether I will be involved by the time March comes around anyway . . . - Kleinzach 22:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness, that was a long time back. I think that when I added that comment I didn't have as strong an understanding of Wikipedia's rules on reliable sources as I do now — the statement was based on a half-remembered comment made by the music director of a production of Iolanthe I was in in college fifteen years ago. Certainly not a reliable source. I support your removal of the comment, and I'm a bit embarassed that it remained there so long. (I had completely forgotten about it, actually.) My apologies. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work putting all 496 operas on the Kobbe list on the talk page, GT. You've inspired me to contemplate putting every opera in the lengthy chronology in "The Oxford Illustrated" up there. I'll see what I can do tomorrow. A list of every opera featured in "The Rough Guide" might be a good one, if I can find out the contents. --Folantin 22:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've done the "Oxford Illustrated". I'll check it over later and try to count the number of operas on there. Another odd list: plenty of obscure Australian and Canadian operas, but nothing by Poulenc. Of course, we could come up with a better selection ourselves, but there's no way the POV paranoiacs who haunt Wikipedia will let us. I'm not that concerned about the lack of G&S (or operas from Azerbaidjan for that matter). Cheers. --Folantin 11:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Had had' - there's nothing technically wrong with it, but it's aesthetically ugly and always annoyed me (particularly as half the time it's not necessary and the other half in can the sentence can be rewritten to avoid it). Proto::► 15:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]