User talk:LilHelpa/Archive 3

Archive Number 3 – Feb. 27, 2010 through May 5, 2010

For my archived awards see: User talk:LilHelpa/awards

German music

If you are in the mood for more music made in Germany please look at two short ones: Gächinger Kantorei and Bach-Collegium Stuttgart - just to fill a bunch of red links. Thanks --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

• Should a German school of painting compete with German music? Anton Ažbe needs some attention. And then you may check a guy who just rode through Germany (this one turned out atrociously long maybe you can advise which sections should be trimmed down). NVO (talk) 12:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for fast and efficient service, again! If you also like Polish music: Polish Requiem, DYK probably on Monday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a Blitzkrieg! Polish music? In the US that means polka! LilHelpa (talk) 15:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for "alla Polacca". Next music from Germany again: Gloria in excelsis Deo, BWV 191, plenty of scholarship added overnight - not by me, I'm just a singer. I don't want to wait for Xmas, dyk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

A serious yawner there. Not sure I was thorough. LilHelpa (talk) 23:03, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

You should hear the music! The last movement belongs to the most sparkling stuff ever written, trumpets and coloraturas ... highest spirits, if you ask me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Interesting! I shall try to hear it. LilHelpa (talk) 11:36, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

look for "b minor mass cum sancto spiritu", more often performed than the cantata, enjoy for example [1] --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

You're right, that's pretty top stuff. My co-workers, less refined than some perhaps, referred to it as "similar to fingernails on a chalkboard". LilHelpa (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I wanted to spare you for once, but DYK asked for copyedit of Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten, BWV 172 - if can stand it. Great music! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Not sure I got it all as I was unsure of some of the technical talk and there may be challenges I'm not up to. LilHelpa (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Meister! What can I offer you this time? - perhaps the discussion or "Bach chorale is not plain". Two more done, thanks to your help, under special occasion. Just for fun - was supposed to be a stub - Thomas Hengelbrock, if you like, more exciting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you - hopefully clarified the overgrown sentence in the Hengelbrock. I should have thanked you sooner but was busy writing more on Bach cantata and fighting a notability question on James Taylor (tenor) - a stub yes, for lack of time, but notability? I add the NYTimes until I have more time for that one. btw Christian Gerhaher DYK, right now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry (Not!) A weekend away to see my granddaughter. Bliss! LilHelpa (talk) 10:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds great. I filled two more red links for Annette Dasch (just in time for her DYK, Hengelbrock tomorrow): Dieter Dorn and Andreas Karasiak. The former: can't believe there was no article on such a person! The other was our soloist - to be mentioned later. I heard that Solomon, stunning! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

John Reed (actor)

Thanks, as always, for your excellent proofreading and wikignoming. Whenever I see your name on my watchlist, I know that something good has happened to an article. Would you be so kind as to run an eye over John Reed (actor)? I have recently expanded it, but I did so piecemeal as obituaries were published. I imagine that you will spot some sloppy errors on my part; and perhaps you can advise on any other structural/prose improvements that ought to be made. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Can you point me to the rule that requires the period after the link? I'd rather use a comma if it's ok? -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:13, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Never mind. I'm learning to love the period. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, and for your help with the article. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Criteria for tagging orphaned articles

Not a criticism, just interested in how you determine an article is orphaned. You tagged two articles I wrote recently Flitch of bacon custom, which I reverted because it had a number of incoming links through a redirect which you might have missed, and Fengjing which I did not revert. But event the latter has two incoming mainspace links. The only other obvious place I could think of where there ought to be a link to this article is from the town Fengjing, but Wikipedia does not have an article on it to link. SpinningSpark 19:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that orphan tag is a funny thing. I probably tagged the article through WP:AWB which assigns the tag automatically. I often revert the tag because it is often not useful (in cases where additional links don't make sense). I'm not sure what is being used as the cutoff for link numbers by AWB. Your article probably shouldn't have been tagged and I'm going to see if I can configure my AWB not to assign the tag anymore.LilHelpa (talk) 21:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

First a big thank you for all the improvements to the mill articles in the navbox {{Lancashire Cotton Corporation}}- can I just mention, the orphan tag I commented out, and you restored at Regent Mill, Failsworth‎. Have I missed something here? Is this a AWB false positive? To my reading Wikipedia:Orphan recommends the use of navboxes for orphan removal. The navbox however is an integral part of the story of each of these mills in an case. It is a big topic and far from a Walled Garden. Just mentioning it- to stop 2 x 53 unnecessary edits.--ClemRutter (talk) 11:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you from Bettymnz4 (talk) 18:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the typos you caught and corrected. I've been working, working, working . . . on this article and can no longer "see" errors.

I do thoroughly appreciate your work. After the peer review I'd like to submit this for featured article status, and I'd like it to be error free. Thanx!!!

acccessdate

Looks o.k. to me. Seven articles, eh? Thanks - you really are doing useful work. :~) Aymatth2 (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I did not mean to be sarcastic at all. I got a jolt when I saw all those pages on my watchlist, and then saw the improvements you had made. I am sometimes a bit sloppy on spelling, and am really glad to see it being fixed. Keep it up! Aymatth2 (talk) 20:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Peter Nicholson (architect)

Hello. In this edit you rightly correct some difficult to spot typos and I'm grateful for that. However, in prettifying the inline citations and placing them in numerical order I'm afraid you have inadvertently changed their meaning. I strive to provide a citation for each and every fact and for neatness I generally collect them together at the end of a sentence, whilst keeping them in their original order. Consider, if you will, the following fiction:

"Standing well over seven feet tall,^[7] with flame red hair,^[5] Potter cut an imposing figure.^[4]"

If the citations are collected together at the end of the sentence they become

"Standing well over seven feet tall, with flame red hair, Potter cut an imposing figure.^[7][5][4]"

If the citations are then re-ordered, they look prettier but lose some of their meaning

"Standing well over seven feet tall, with flame red hair, Potter cut an imposing figure.^[4][5][7]"

Perhaps you would consider a partial revert? —MegaPedant 05:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm certainly flexible on this and I'm not sure where the Manual of Style stands on it. It is an AWB-suggested edit and if someone else comes by and edits with AWB you are apt to have the problem again. I agree that your method is superior in giving the reader a headstart on knowing what is referenced and what is referenced where. I'll let you do the revert unless you prefer I do it.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. You might consider informing the AWB developers of your concerns. LilHelpa (talk) 14:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I edit entirely manually, which is why I miss typos! It's easier for me to do a full revert, then fix the typos you caught and the citations whose order isn't relevant. Thanks for your understanding. —MegaPedant 23:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

• Drive-by comment. I don't like too many commas and prefer that they are optional. A lot of readers have English as their second language. Commas may be used for pauses but should not affect the meaning. So here is some real pedantry: if you take out the commas, did he only cut an imposing figure when his hair was flame red? Or was he only over seven feet when his hair was flame red? Perhaps simpler would be: Potter was an imposing figure, standing well over seven feet tall and with flame red hair. Check my edit history, pick any article and rip it apart. Please. This just caught my attention and got me thinking. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

  Now there's an interesting diversion. I'm afraid I like to write rather long sentences and long sentences tend to need commas to separate the clauses, though I appreciate that they can be difficult for those for whom English is not their first language. I admit I'm not an authority on grammar but I do have something of an innate feeling for it, rather than a deep technical knowledge of it. I do believe though, that commas have their places and that very few of them are actually optional. I think I understand what you're asking but I'm struggling to understand what the sentence would mean if the commas were simply removed: my current feeling is that they can't be removed without rearranging the words and even making some substitutions. The best commaless version I can offer that remains true to the sense of the original sentence would be Standing well over seven feet tall and having flame red hair made Potter an imposing figure. That form might be the more accessible one, but I find it less interesting than the original. His two notable characteristics (namely, his height and the colour of his hair), while individually would give someone a striking appearance, clearly work together to make Potter especially imposing. Perhaps I ought to explain that my reason for preferring longer sentences is because they allow more description and because they flow more smoothly than shorter sentences. Short sentences can be seen as rather patronising: Potter stood over seven feet tall. He had flame red hair. That made him an imposing figure is only a short step away from the equivalent for under-fives: Potter was very tall. Potter had very red hair. What an imposing figure Potter was! A question I would ask: is it fair to compromise the quality of English writing when many foreign learners seek good examples from which to learn? There is, after all, an awful lot of bad English on the Internet. —MegaPedant 03:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't know. The trouble with making all sentences short and positive and comma-free is that they get a bit staccato, as you say. I do not think anyone would complain that they are patronizing. Easy to read is good for most people. You know the quotes. Mark Twain said something like strike out every third word on principle, and Churchill said short words are best and old short words are best of all. But did he follow his own advice? I don't think so. And then there is Gibbon... My instinct is that simple prose is best, if only because other editors are going to come in and destroy whatever elegant prose you produce. But I am wide open to criticism for my own laborious, misspelled and ungrammatical prose. I was just struck by that sentence. My advice, which I am sure you will follow, is "Do what you think best". :-) Aymatth2 (talk) 04:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I suggest the middle way in this (and most) endeavor(s). Moderation. Something that our politics in the US seems to be lacking. Ah, but don't get me started... LilHelpa (talk) 11:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Euler, you "Yooler"!!

Please. I've reverted this edit. If you pronounce "Euler" as if it were "Yooler", everyone (except non-mathematicians) will think you're illiterate. This name is heard and uttered by everyone every day, and it sounds like the name of a member of an NFL football team from Houston. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

..... please notice the length of this article. You'll be busy for a long long long time if you try to "correct" the hundreds of articles that say "an Euler", and I'll revert all of you "corrections", and you'll get the attention of lots and lots of people. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry ' bout that, Eugene. LilHelpa (talk) 00:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Did AWB flag these on its own? If it did, I'll see about filing a bug report for it. Please let me know. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the very fast response. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

You fool!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Surprise_%28emotion%29&action=historysubmit&diff=353051514&oldid=351691392 CompuHacker (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Um, what's your point? It called for a cititation (even though it's common knowledge) and I gave a proper one. Oh, and thanks for being so cordial and communicative. Or were you going for the ballbuster thing? LilHelpa (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Being sarcastic won't get you anywhere. Anyway, look closely at what you did. CompuHacker (talk) 11:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah. Yeah, guess I had a hard time seeing that both times. Automation is truly a two-edged sword. Not sure why it was necessary to call me a fool, though. LilHelpa (talk) 11:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Heya, LilHelpa. Thank for your your help here! --Shirt58 (talk) 15:54, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! LilHelpa (talk) 21:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your help with Charles Morton (Librarian). It gave me some added energy I needed. Linuxcpa (talk) 17:23, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Nice job on that. LilHelpa (talk) 21:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Request an AWB whacking

Hiya. Saw this edit of yours at HMAS Sydney (R17), and think its just what I'm looking for for another article. HMAS Australia (1911) is undergoing a review at the moment, and one of the observations made is non-linear citations (a made-up example would be ...foo bar bar.^[62][48]). Would you be so kind as to whack Australia in a similar fashion to your Sydney edit? Thanks in advance. -- saberwyn 10:59, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Done --LilHelpa (talk) 13:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Claudia Eder

You certainly deserve that barnstar! If you like more German music: Claudia Eder (don't miss pictures), DYK approved over night (being female and good looking seems to help). Waiting: Adalbert Kraus, Georg Christoph Biller, Wolfgang Schöne. And music itself: Gestural Variations. Only if you are in the mood, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Very nice! I tried dressing up her references a bit. Will work on it a bit more later. LilHelpa (talk) 11:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Can you imagine her being the Witch of Endor from the pulpit in this church? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

She looks sharp enough to pull off most any part with the proper makeup and costume. LilHelpa (talk) 15:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. So imagine just a concert, no costume (forgive me, I don't remember her dress then, this is almost 30 years ago), - and imagine her making witchy sounds (thanks to the composer), high up where the minister normally speaks, she created quite some atmosphere. I have the recording - that was never for sale. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I might have had to close my eyes :) LilHelpa (talk) 17:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Start over, open your eyes please for Jakob Stämpfli (bass) - skip the others, they all made it to the Main page already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Is "Hochschule für Musik und Darstellende Kunst Frankfurt am Main" merely a translation or is it an earlier name? If a translation, I would leave the wikilink in English. LilHelpa (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

It's the name. The English is a translation, smile. - Thanks for looking! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Ha! I understood that! Not sure of the convention for this but, in the English Wikipedia, the German name redirects to the English and that's what got me thinking about it. The WP Manual of Style says as a general rule use the name which is likely to be most familiar to readers of English. I'm happy either way. LilHelpa (talk) 20:18, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I confess that I probably should read the manual of style some day. My point of view: as there is a link the reader easily gets both, I can make the German name a bit more familiar. Without a link I would give it in English, ok? - In the meantime I wrote Wittener Tage für neue Kammermusik, an all German title, there were several links that way. I observe a tendency to keeping the original name, also for universities like Hochschule für Musik und Theater München. I changed Folkwang Academy to Folkwang Hochschule, - until the Hochschule changed to Folkwang University a few days later. So I will not move Frankfurt ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

As you like it, sir. LilHelpa (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

sir? still feeling rather female, smile --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh my. There's a long story behind that one. Sorry! BTW, have I ever mentioned that you have a lovely smile? LilHelpa (talk) 10:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Underconstruction

Please be more respectful of the under construction notice. I was in the middle of a major revision of the Lavochkin La-7 article when you made your changes and cause an edit conflict. I've incorporated your changes, but I could have done without the extra work.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Ooops... Sorry! I didn't see that one. LilHelpa (talk) 10:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Weekend Special

An article that you have been involved in editing, Weekend Special, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weekend Special. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. B.Wind (talk) 18:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Keith William MacLellan

Thank you for the changes made, but a number of links on the page no longer work as a result of the changes - is this deliberate or by mistake? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mac5278 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Not sure to which lines you refer. I mean only to help, not harm the article. LilHelpa (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see you refer to the external links which I did not properly wikify. Should be OK now. If you need any help with it, just ask. LilHelpa (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks - my first wiki effort - all clear now...--Mac5278 (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

speedy nomination of Tyler Moss

Please note that this article that you nominated for speedy deletion was actually the subject of vandalism and should not have been nominated. I have reverted the article to its last good state and removed the deletion request. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, dang, didn't even occur to me to check that. Duh. LilHelpa (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Art Institute of California - Orange County

Thanks so much for your edits! really appreciated! it was my first redo of an article, i go to this school and it's article was really lax compared to the other art institutes, borrowed a lot from the other ones, thanks again for your diligence! Aeonjoey (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. Happy editing! LilHelpa (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate "Correction"

I notice you made a "correction" in Begging the question using AWB. Note the correct title is "There Are Two Errors in the the Title of This Book". As you are not the first to do this I'm wondering if there is some way to prevent AWB from seeing this as an error. (I'll add a comment which may help). Gr8white (talk) 03:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

A LARGE COMMENT will definitely help. Bah. I hate it when I miss one of these. LilHelpa (talk) 10:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, the sic works better and more elegantly. Nice. LilHelpa (talk) 10:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit a couple of articles

I noticed you used AWB on a couple of articles I've been working on. Could you run it on a couple of other articles?... Jordan River (Utah) and List of counties in Utah. I just wished there was an automatic program to correct my bad writing. Thank You Bgwhite (talk) 04:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. Nice work there... and pretty clean. Be aware that AWB has its limitations. It doesn't work on stuff within templates for example. I often use it to correct things that it doesn't handle on its own just to get the wider look at the articles I'm fixing. Happy to do your requests anytime. Keep up the great work! LilHelpa (talk) 10:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Anything to improve the articles I'm working on is very much appreciated. I will bug you every so often. Bgwhite (talk) 17:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Witten

Thanks for the compliment above - and for the hard work on Kurtág! Did you find him on the Wittener Tage für neue Kammermusik? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Missed that one. It's pretty clean. AWB has it with just one extra space. Will eyeball it better later. LilHelpa (talk) 11:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Anand Kurian

the line should read ‘The Laggard's Lock’, (co-written with Nitin Borwankar) describes how our mindsets do NOT always keep pace with new technologies and how we tend to use new tools in a less than optimal way Thanks for doing this all over Wikipedia though - we should really applaud this. Should i just go ahead and make the correction - I thought it more respectful to point it out to you! the capitals etc are only for you and not for the article

Thanks for the kind words and for advising me of the correction. It was truly a goof on my part as I meant to insert "do" for the first "not". Sometimes the eyes get a little weary and I should probably have quit. -- LilHelpa (talk) 10:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

"Minor" Edit Flag Usage

First off, I love what you do. I ain't here to complain! However, I did notice that your recent edit of the Phonograph article was rather extensive yet it was flagged "Minor". As has been pointed out to me:

A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute.

Because I want to see you continue doing what you do, I'm suggesting you not flag your edits minor if they touch any links or change any templates (or HTML). Some people out there haven't taken their medication today and I don't want to see one of 'em latch onto your ankle.

Keep up the good work! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 00:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

That's an excellent call. Of course even my most extensive copyedits are "Minor", so about 98% of my edits are minor, maybe higher. I do try to change the default when appropriate, but I often forget, sometimes realizing it just after saving. I appreciate the warning. Thanks. LilHelpa (talk) 00:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Typos in image names

I reverted this edit [2] -- it fixed a typo in an image name thereby turning the image (which had the typo) into a redlink. I would recommend against correcting typos in image names. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 01:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Damn. Of course. I always try to avoid this. LilHelpa (talk) 01:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

No sweat -- you are doing the work of the saints. :) ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 04:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)