User talk:Mpwrmnt

Welcome!

Hello, Mpwrmnt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Sr13 18:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sr13! I appreciate that someone noticed that I'm here! I checked out YOUR User Page & I must say that I'm impressed! I certainly wasn't doing anything near as bold, honorable and exciting as the stuff you're doing when *I* was in junior high school - we didn't *have* middle schools back then (which was probably before your PARENTS were born!!) So, congratulations! Keep up the good work and thanks again for offering to help out a newbie like me! Laurie Fox 08:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found an existing stub article on a verifiably notable person, Leslie Bassett, who happens to be a personal friend of mine. I would like to honor him by expanding the article, but as it would come under the Biography of Living Persons category, I understand that it would need to be undertaken very carefully. Can anyone suggest the best way to go about this project?

I have explored his own website & believe that it could be the basis for fleshing out the article. My idea is to contact him, tell him what I'd like to do & enlist his assistance in writing the article (or at least approving / editing an article that I would write based on the information on his website.) Does that sound like a plan?

I realize that his website will not be considered a "reliable source" for verifiability purposes, but I'm confident that objective third party sources can easily be found to substantiate the statements I / we will make.

I made an initial edit, just adding the fact that he is now an *emeritus* professor (Should I cite the University of Michigan site from which I obtained the actual name of his professorship?) and the detail of his Pulitzer Prize, (which I obtained from the category link that was already in the stub article) because I thought those two facts were totally uncontroversial, a matter of public record and important basic facts. However, I don't want to go any farther until I have some assurance that I'm going about it in an appropriate manner.

Thanks for any help you all can give to a newcomer!

You should bear Wikipedia:Conflict of interest in mind and tread carefully; I appreciate you understand the need for this. Your edits so far look fine. I would suggest giving sources for everything; it saves time trying to find them later, it reduces the chance there'll be an argument about your statements, or that they'll be reverted under the biography of living persons rule, and it's a Wikipedia policy. --ais523 12:54, 27 November 2006 (U T C)

After rereading the page about conflicts of interest, I think you should be fine as long as you continue to keep to a neutral point of view; the page is mainly aiming at people trying to use Wikipedia for advertising. --ais523 12:57, 27 November 2006 (U T C)

Leslie Bassett

Hi Laurie!

I think that expanding his article is an excellent idea; he's a very notable composer indeed, and needs a better article. Some details and the works list are verifiable in the latest New Grove, and if there are published sources for other details they should suffice as well. (I met him, but don't know him well, and prefer to be anonymous here.) Best wishes, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia!! Antandrus (talk) 05:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re Vox Femina Los Angeles

The categories show up fine. You probably needed to hit the Refresh button to force the server to show the newest version of the page. I found this article tagged for speedy deletion. I removed the tag, and moved the material from the talk into the article, edited some to avoid copyright violation. Barely, and it could use more rewording to take it farther away from the copyrighted text.

I removed the deletion tag, but I wouldn't be surprised if another editor took it to WP:AFD sometime. As you can imagine, we get scores of articles on musical groups every day and are pretty wary of including most of them, se WP:MUSIC for our standards. Your best bet for this article is to dig up references to the group from neutral and respected third parties, e.g. newspaper and magazine articles and reviews. These can be placed in the External links section. This will go a long way toward protecting the article from future deletion. If no such third party material exists, then yeah the article will probably be deleted eventually. Herostratus 14:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Choir vandalism

Hi again, Laurie. Yes, you were right: it was vandalism. When you see something like this but aren't sure, sometimes it is helpful to look at the other contributions by the same editor [1] -- clicking on the "diffs" shows you that it's a bored school kid. You can also read about how to deal with vandalism generally here: Wikipedia:Vandalism. Thanks for pointing it out--I fixed it--and happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 01:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Anonymous 4. I love them ... last time I heard them live was here in Santa Barbara a couple years ago, in a nice resonant stone church; they were doing a program of Landini and a few other 14th-century Italians, and it was a lovely experience. Enjoy, I'm jealous! :) Antandrus (talk) 06:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oy, I fixed it myself: I cannot bear vandalism and swat it as fast as I can move my mouse.

Here's how to fix vandalism: Go to the article history. Find the "diff" that contains the vandalism (usually the most recent one) by clicking the little buttons to the left of the date and time column (pick the good version on the left and the vandal version on the right). Then click the "compare selected versions" button above the column. You should see a redline/strikeout page which has the vandalism on the right and the good version on the left. Then click the "edit" link on the good version, i.e. the one on the left. Then save the page, usually with an edit summary like "reverting vandalism". You're done!

If you are an admin, you get an extra "rollback" button like I have which saves lots of steps. There are also automated tools you can add that make it easier, but I've never used any of them. Hope this helps! Antandrus (talk) 19:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I may chime in, one of the automated tools that Antandrus speaks of is located here. All you have to do is add the script to your monobook. Hope that helps you further. KOS | talk 19:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good! I was hoping someone who knew where they were located would chime in; thanks!

Mpwrmnt, I am truly baffled by that particular vandal; that is so rare I've only seen it a very few times in my whole time on the project, i.e. one vandalism followed by a genuinely good edit, from the same person. Sometimes it's two kids on adjacent computers in a school library (or somewhere like that) which share the same IP address, but more likely it is a kid associated with the "non vandalized" choir who wants to make the other look bad. Just guessing ... Antandrus (talk) 19:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix these?

I notice that you've previously fixed some stuff on the Epicanthal fold article, thus I direct my request to you, as I'm new here & don't know how to do them myself. 1) The pic of the young woman has some vandalism to the copyright notice. 2) The other pic says it was cropped from a larger pic. The link to that larger pic is broken. Thanks! Mpwrmnt 06:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mpwrmnt. I'd be glad to assist you, but I'm not sure I see what it is you're referring to? The GFDL notice for Image:IMG 0878.JPG appears to be in tact; the external link from the second image, Image:Epicanthal fold.jpg, is no longer working, but this is probably just a case of that website shifting their images as opposed to a vandalism issue. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Salzedo

Looking at this, [2] I'd say you are doing a great job! Please continue; you're getting the hang of it nicely. Happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 15:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The stuff I added on Salzedo is from Carlos Salzedo: From Aeolian to Thunder, by Dewey Owens (Salzedo's student). For a while I wasn't entirely convinced they had actually published it, but it seems there are more copies out there than my teacher's.... I'll be adding more as long as I urgently need to finish my grad school applications.

Anyway, you don't appear to be a harpist. How'd you get interested in Salzedo?

--Girlfriend of Merv 01:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Status of 71.65.93.54

No, Anonymous users do not have the power to unblock themselves or anybody else, nor do logged in users. In this case, the IP address user merely placed the template on his page, indicating that he had been unblocked, when in reality, he hadn't. Cheers and Happy Editing. Canadian-Bacon 18:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki messages

Greetings! I had to laugh when I read the VP post and reply: I'm so not a techie at these things, and almost never edit MediaWiki things myself (preferring to leave it to people who specialise in such stuff: I'm just a musicologist and composer, LOL). Here, by the way, is a list of all the Mediawiki messages: Special:Allmessages. You could work directly with Mike Dillon if there is something you'd like to see changed.

Have to get away from Wikipedia for a bit, so I'm off to San Diego shortly to see Boris Godunov! Sure do hope it's a good production ... :) Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 03:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings again. Since it was a school, and had two last warnings and two previous vandalism blocks, I gave it a school block (anons blocked, logged-in-users may edit) [3]. Happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kitten

Herostratus has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Herostratus (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was just thinking of you since I was over at Vox Femina Los Angeles and remembered your nice note to me. I see you're not very active, but I hope you are doing well! Herostratus (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]