User talk:Zingarese/Archives/2018/July

Archives

Your GA nomination of Franz Schubert

The article Franz Schubert you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Franz Schubert for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 20:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the automated bot message, please allow me to add my personal congratulations. An excellent overhaul and now an excellent article. Tim riley talk 20:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tim, thank you so much again for your detailed review and for your time! I am very happy to hear that the article is now a GA. Now on to FA... :-) —Zingarese (talk) 21:06, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations from me too, a bystander who enjoyed the procedings! Schubert could now appear in the DYK section of the Main page. Do you have a preference for one line about him? Compare Pierre Boulez. - Tim, may I ask you in this quiet corner if you have any information about the Katie Clarke who appeared with Boulez 8 times, and that is about all we know about her, + that she joined the ENO in 1975 and appeared as different valkyrie there in 1976. Opera Scotland claims that she sang Brünnhilde "on the continent", but I doubt it, seems more likely that she sang "Brünnhild'" as part of her Schwertleite text. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ps: The last DYK I recall mentioning Schubert was for Cathinka Buchwieser, - see the pic by his friend showing him in danger from two nude women (related to poetry, of course) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you so much! Love the picture :-) Did you want to help nominate him for DYK? It's about time he makes it to the Main Page again! I think "...despite a lifespan of just 31 years, Franz Schubert composed over 1,500 works?" is a good hook, or maybe "...that Franz Schubert was a torchbearer at Ludwig van Beethoven's funeral?" Zingarese (talk) 22:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good ideas. We had his 700 songs already (with a tenor who recorded them all), and sheer volume doesn't say anything about quality. The other is a bit sad, no? - Perhaps around some image people don't know already. - I recently listened to symphonies 4-6 with the Staatskapelle in the Pierre Boulez Hall, - delightful. Bedtime for me, and yes, I can nominate for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that must have been a unforgettable experience to hear those works in that hall! I assume Barenboim was conducting? He also performed the completed Schubert sonatas in the Boulez Saal recently. Zingarese (talk) 22:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he was conducting, and they turn the performers 180° during intermission, so every listener gets two views. He seemed to enjoy it all as we did! - Beethoven piano quartets: can you positively add that detail (... published as a piano quartet ...) to the article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is sensational - there needs to be more halls like that around the globe :-) - and no problem, I just added that information into the article! Zingarese (talk) 16:05, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Piano Quartets (Beethoven), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Quintet for Piano and Winds (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Daniil Trifonov discography

On 5 July 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Daniil Trifonov discography, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the discography of pianist Daniil Trifonov includes one Grammy Award-winning album and two Grammy-nominated albums? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Daniil Trifonov discography. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Daniil Trifonov discography), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Zingarese, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! – Joe (talk) 11:11, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will let you know if I have any questions. Zingarese (talk) 16:50, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

classical music, composers and players

Thank you for quality articles beginning with Yekwon Sunwoo, for Daniil Trifonov discography, for your expansion of Franz Schubert, Lion's Choice and Piano Sonata No. 2 (Chopin), for adding the "vital article" tags and fighting vandalsim, with precise messages, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gerda, Thank you so much! It means a lot, especially coming from you :-) Zingarese (talk) 16:49, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ;) - I went ahead and nominated Schubert, - I missed the deadline for too many to risk it for him. Feel free to add ALT1 to ALTn ;) - but remember that too many options are stressful for the reviewer. - Language question (warning: OR): to my knowledge, Schwamm is German (meaning both a certain family of mushroom and a sponge), never heard that in Austria, only Schwammerln (plural, you rarely have only one). Great new image on you user page! I just received news that a friend died, a bass in one of my choirs and on its board, - I take anything uplifting with pleasure. We sang The Company of Heaven next to each other, here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:05, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am so sorry for your loss.😰😰 My deepest sympathies go out to you and everyone whose lives were impacted by your late friend - a good soul has certainly ascended to heaven.

Thank you so much for the nomination - I really like the current hook as it is, so won’t add any more. Regarding Schwamm - it’s certainly supposed to refer the German language - will fix now. :-) Zingarese (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CD Projekt

Why are you trying to hide the fact CD Projekt made the atrocity we know to be Saints Row 2 (PC)?

Not cool

Work for em? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:745F:FD69:2425:D710:7F84:E971 (talk) 08:22, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, all content must be written from a neutral point of view. Just because you think it's the worst port ever made doesn't mean it can go on the article; these views must be supported by publication in reliable sources. And no, I obviously dont work for them. Zingarese (talk) 13:52, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not just what I think, its common knowledge in the gaming community. Did you bother to look around online? plenty of reliable sources that state its a poor port... IGN, GameSpot, and PCGamer are just a few. They also "lost" the source code, just so the game can never be updated by anyone, including the mod community. FieldEffect (talk) 02:10, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is your responsibility to provide a credible citation to your claim published along with the claim. XYZt (talk) 02:17, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I assume this is some kind of "rule", if so, is there not one that states before reverting an edit, you should check if the information is true? I cant find editing rules anywhere, perhaps you'd like to point me in the right direction? Funny how you're talking about providing information with reliable sources but at the same time aren't providing any sources. FieldEffect (talk) 02:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

XYZtSpace is absolutely correct - the burden on providing reliable sources to new content is on the person who introduced the content. Gamespot and IGN are only reliable if the content is staff-written. Refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources for more information. Speaking of PC Gamer, This source is certainly acceptable - but please write it along the lines of “Matt Elliott of PC Gamer lists their port of Saints Row 2 as one of the worst PC ports ever made” to adhere to Wikipedia’s neutral point of view policy and to accurately reflect the source. In any case, I was more concerned about this edit , which was pure vandalism and the main reason I reverted the edits. Hope this helps; please let me know if you have any further questions or need assistance. Zingarese (talk) 03:36, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Piano Sonata No. 2 (Chopin)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Piano Sonata No. 2 (Chopin) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JohnWickTwo -- JohnWickTwo (talk) 19:20, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:27E0:7500:81F9:2684:75E9:AF37 (talk) 02:37, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bud

tell me about urself zinga — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:27E0:7500:81F9:2684:75E9:AF37 (talk) 02:46, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there.

Hi. If you have been reading the news you will know the coldest temperature on Earth is now -144 F. If you could fix that article I would appreciate it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.144.215.139 (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Lowest temperature recorded on Earth#Undoing a change based on satellite measure of near-ground temps. Regards, Zingarese talk · contribs 00:38, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Lion's Choice

On 10 July 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lion's Choice, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lion's Choice, based in St. Louis, was named the Missouri state winner for the National Restaurant Association's Restaurant Neighbor Award in 2006? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lion's Choice. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lion's Choice), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 02:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

C L Bryant

Why do you allow people to cast themselves in a false good light, when there are verifiable questions about their character with references?

You allowed comments in the FreedomWorks page about criticisms from astroturfing, citing a news/opinion piece,

I thought wikipedia was supposed to be informative and complete, not a PR shill for conservatives.

Lucy Butler — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucybut (talk • contribs) 00:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucybut: The primary reason I reverted your edit is because it appeared to add content that was a copy and paste of the entire text of the article. However, in regards to the information you introduced, your references do not provide any information (such as a link) that would help readers identify the source/origin of the content. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for more information on how to properly cite a source, and let me know if you have any questions. Zingarese talk · contribs 00:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1999 Women's World Cup cheating

Dear Zingarese,

you keep reverting my changes on 1999 Women's World Cup page.

I believe I have a valid reason for my contributions.

Please familiarize yourself with the subject matter https://www.google.ca/search?q=briana+scurry+cheating&oq=briana+scurry+cheating&aqs=chrome..69i57.5519j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Please watch the penalty shootout https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uos71JHj6nE

Please let me know if I can go ahead and modify the text to reflect the reality in a more truthful manner.

Thank you.

2607:FEA8:A69F:FB9A:53B:727E:EA83:3EDC (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. The problem with your edit is the failure to cite a reliable source. Please cite a reliable source to support your claims. this source is acceptable, as is this one. See Help:Referencing for beginners for more information. Also, although I did revert your last edit as not adhering to neutral point of view, it appeared as non-neutral to me only because it was unsourced. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Zingarese talk · contribs 01:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dominic edits

I would like to inform you that the edits made to the Dominic page were entirely accurate.

Reference:

User talk:***** From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You have a new message (last change). Jump to navigationJump to search July 2018 Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Dominic, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Zingarese talk · contribs 00:09, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Thanks for the guidance.

I think I understand what you are conveying in terms of reliable source, thanks for correcting me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cnybrook (talk • contribs) 03:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lambert edits

The reversal was indeed a mistake on your part. Much of what you see on the page was added by myself (as the primary caretaker of the page for well over a year), and most of what I edited was merely paring down and fixing minor grammar/formatting issues in my own contributions to the page. The only part that I removed that was another user's recent contribution was because it contributed nothing new and made the sentence in question grammatically incorrect. To this end, many of my recent edits were given as "Minor Edits", a categorization I believe is justified, and one I see little reason for explaining as it clutters up the edit history (particularly seeing as how every change can be seen in the version comparison). I try to give reasons for my major edits most of the time, but again, I am of the opinion that most Minor Edits do not warrant a full blown explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digital inf3rno (talk • contribs) 06:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Digital inf3rno: Thank you for your contributions, and for bringing this to my attention: it was indeed a mistake in my part, and I am sorry. However, I would encourage you to provide an edit summary for each edit you make, especially if you delete existing text as you had done: this is good practice. per WP:FIES: “Edits that do not have an edit summary are more likely to be reverted, because it may not be obvious what the purpose of the edit was.” When I came across your removal of content without a summary, I decided to revert it as unexplained content removal. (My intention was to just undo that edit alone, so that is my mistake.) Let me know if you have further questions. Regards, Zingarese talk · contribs 16:23, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Piano Sonata No. 2 (Chopin)

The article Piano Sonata No. 2 (Chopin) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Piano Sonata No. 2 (Chopin) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JohnWickTwo -- JohnWickTwo (talk) 13:01, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's good news! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:44, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Gerda, and also my many thanks to the reviewer, JohnWickTwo. I will take a look at the DYK nom shortly! Zingarese talk · contribs 17:19, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]