User talk:Rothorpe/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Endashes
An endash is similar to a hyphen, except an endash is slightly longer than a hyphen, and shorter than an emdash. I just find the Template:Ndash is a simple way of producing the endash that can be used in date ranges. Bcperson89 (talk) 01:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your prompt reply. I should have pointed out that the first sign I mentioned, –, is not produced by typing a hyphen (which is indeed even shorter: -) but comes from clicking on it in the Insert section beneath the editing pane: –, and looks to me just like an endash, which I type with the ampersand-ndash-semicolon code: – (again: – – ). But to you it looks like a hyphen? Rothorpe (talk) 02:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Please DON'T Undo/Revert my edit's!!!!
Hi,
Why is it you feel it absolutely necessary to undo/revert my edit's when they are perfectly okay???, Please explain that one to me if you can't give an explination that means you're just another Wikipedia - "Jobsworth" — mmmm "Jobsworth" that about sums you up, Anyway you keep undoing my edits as mark my words I'll keep on undoing them so in hindsight you're wasting your time Pal
Regards —217.28.3.166 (talk) 08:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps you'd care to explain why you regard Actor/Comedian as an improvement on Actor, comedian. But I was a little hasty: some of your changes were okay. You ought to read the jobsworth article again: I've made some changes to clarify the definition. Rothorpe (talk) 16:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for understanding and sorry for the insult :), by the way your changes to "Jobsworth" were needed —217.28.3.166 (talk) 18:49, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Captain Beefheart
Dearest Rothorpe no Beefheart though your ciriculum vitae of copywriting is extensive and probably unparalled in the Online English speaking universe and despite the fact that I made a couple of boo-boo's which also needed to be removed "these were" whether the musicians are implicit or not in the previous line does not read well. "Drawn from" would also sound better. I bet you are a Spartan minimalist.Masterknighted (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- Read it again tomorrow, and you'll see that it is now perfect. Less is more! Rothorpe (talk) 01:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Invitation
Dear Rothorpe/Archive 2,
I am inviting you to join the Miles Davis WikiProject. I found you, Rothorpe/Archive 2, on several revision history statistics of articles related with "Miles Davis", and therefore I am of the opinion, that you should be one of those members of this WikiProject I recently created. I hope you will approve my invitation.
Regards,
Ophiuchus
"regard" is fine with me. I hope it doesn't get changed back to "recognize" again. Regards, 207.161.207.162 (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
No Beefs, yet...
Thanks for the welcome Rothorpe.
Not being fully 'wiki-literate' yet, I've made a few tech blunders in Beefheart - but I'm hopefully getting there.
Any guidance welcome.
Like all newbies, I wanna fly before I've learned to walk ;)
Webcor (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Placed 5 chunky new paras into The Magic Band section of Captain Beefheart
This in an effort to
a) point out the difference between "His" Magic Band & "The" Magic Band in recorded titles (which confuses many a discographer)
b) Touch upon social attitude of the era - band style, teen angst, etc.
c) introduce the singles releases, with their ins-and-outs broadly covered, leading to other band member associations & labels.
(When quoting album titles should I adopt italics?)
Meanwhile, trust it's not too much of a dog's dinner grammatically, regards
Webcor (talk) 15:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Don't agree my comments (edited in Beefheart) were 'speculative' - the whole thrust of "Captain Beefheart Vs The Grunt People" was based around the duo watching sci-fi movies - and Beefheart's "Metal Man Has Won His Wings" was read from a sci-fi comic, right down to the "Wheet Wheet". Zappa bought fairground materials to build a rocket inside the studio for the opera. The group were affected by the Vietnam war - their parents were living in trailer homes - they were a disaffected youth in a desert environ - their fathers were working in aero-space plants - the Moon landing was an inspiration etc, etc.
Webcor (talk) 04:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I see you reverted my edit. I suppose you're right as he was only a British subject for a year even though he spent a large portion of his life there. Just wanted to say thanks for the 'good faith' mention in your revert, that goes a long way here in Wikipedia, some people revert without the good manners to explain why or accept that the previous editor was trying to improve the project. Have a good day! Zarcadia (talk) 23:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the trouble to mention that. Glad you agree about James. Have a good day, too. Rothorpe (talk) 23:59, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Fothering-Thomas
I fixed a typo in the name of this Molesworth character. Why did you unfix it? I'm afraid I don't have the book here, or I could send you a screen shot; but here's a blog article where someone gets it right: "http://www.bmj.com/content/317/7174/1720.2.extract". Please restore my fix asap! Thanks, --- Jrcoxhead (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- Don't believe blogs. Wikipedia is infallible, as any fule kno. Rothorpe (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- I don't believe blogs. I have the books---they were great favorites of mine as a child. The character's name was Fothering-Thomas! If you have a source for your assertion, please cite it; if not, you'll have to believe me.Jrcoxhead (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
&
It didn't take long. Just F3 and Google Chrome. I'm not an expert in copyediting like yourself, though. Sir Richardson (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the compliment. In Internet Explorer I'd use 'find' and click through, altering each one individually, very tedious. I've got Google Chrome, but how it works is a mystery; do explain if you care to. Rothorpe (talk) 17:43, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Well, all new browsers take getting used to , but I've found that it's worth it. I went onto Firefox, tried Chrome and never went back. I particularly like how you can Google search with the URL bar. Sir Richardson (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Also, I now own John French's Beefheart biography and have been reading it quite fervently. Its only faults are sometimes egregious typographical and spelling errors. I'm quite astounded at how severe much of the abuse of the band members was during the creation of Trout Mask Replica. I'll seek to improve the article with referencing once I finish at (and when procrastination doesn't get the better of me). Sir Richardson (talk) 20:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- As it happens, something odd has happened to the look of WP in my Explorer, so all the more reason to experiment with Chrome. How do I get rid of the squiggly red underlining of the words as I type?
- Yes, I can imagine the errors in JF's book - sadly, a feature of pop/rock books. And yes, wasn't he an evil taskmaster? All in the name of art, blah blah. Rothorpe (talk) 22:01, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
the Shadows versus The Shadows
I hope you do not think I am being too pedantic but the name of the group/band is "The Shadows". (refer Tony's drum kit on the The Shadows first album) Hence in the text they should be referred to as The Shadows. In a similar vein there was much discussion re the Small Faces or The Small Faces or Small Faces. A proof point was the band's web site where they are called Small Faces. Hence I went to see Liverpool play, I went to see Small Faces play and I also went to see The Shadows play. At the end of the day an encyclopedia must be 100% accurate so over to you to revert your edit relating to The Shadows. Again apologies for being very pedantic (at this late hour!) Boatman (talk) 19:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, this is what it says at WP:Manual of Style (MUSTARD) (linked from my User page for occasions like these!):
- "Names (definite article)
- An authoritative source will determine whether the word "the" is part of a band's name. In the case of the Velvet Underground, for example, it must be included, while in that of Black Sabbath, it must not. A redirect (or disambiguation) should be created for the alternate name (with or without "the").
- Mid-sentence, the word "the" should not be capitalized in continuous prose, except when quoted or beginning a phrase in italics or bold. Capital "The" is optional in wikilinks, and may be preferred when listing: The Beatles, The Velvet Underground..."
- These days I can resist the temptation to change the capital The in links, when bolded, after 'They called themselves...' etc.
- It's a question of house style, and on balance more upmarket publishers (eg all posh newspapers) don't capitalise the The, except in a few cases (none of them pop groups) where it is regarded as a formal part of the name, as in the case of The Hague, but not, I'm afraid, the Shadows.
- Indeed Small Faces are often wrongly called the Small Faces; to put The would be even worse... Rothorpe (talk) 21:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for your helpful edits to the new article I created, at Richard Smith (silent film director). Much appreciated! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Denis Colin for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Denis Colin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denis Colin until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Jay Σεβαστόςdiscuss 23:10, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm back!
Hi, just got back after a long Wikibreak and am picking things up again. BTW I was surprised to see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sightings of Madeleine McCann. TerriersFan (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
- Excellent to see you back. Welcome! Yes, I've just put a few commas in that one, which wasn't on my watchlist, after admiring your sprited defence of it at AfD... Rothorpe (talk) 01:26, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Freddie and The Dreamers
Hello Rothorpe.
For two years the above page has had continual deletions from various people.
I am a former member of the band.As are the others on the page.Will you please leave it alone. We had for about 6 months nobody tampering with it.Not saying we are perfect wikis but the continual deletions are not warranted.It is a point of verification.
Thanks Respectfully Eamonn — Preceding unsigned comment added by EamonnMK (talk • contribs) 19:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think you may have the wrong person. I'm perfectly happy with the current version, which mentions you and your band. All the best, Rothorpe (talk) 20:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- I have placed my views at Talk:Freddie and the Dreamers#Edit warring where future discussion should best take place. TerriersFan (talk) 23:19, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- Any suggestion on the way forward, please? The page needs to be unprotected at some point but, at the moment, unprotection is likely to result in a resumption of the edit warring. TerriersFan (talk) 17:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
- I have placed my views at Talk:Freddie and the Dreamers#Edit warring where future discussion should best take place. TerriersFan (talk) 23:19, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
You have some nerve saying the edit makes no difference and the reverting it - especially when you first revert was of a perfectly grammatical sentence which you misread by stopping at a comma as if it were a period. I disagree with the value of all of the last edit, and formally warn you not to violate wp3rr. μηδείς (talk) 01:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
{{wp-3rr}}
Cookies
 Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page, or eat these cookies on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munchplate}}. |
Just to say...
Appreciate the copy edit of Roy Orbison. --Moni3 (talk) 00:35, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, it's a very good article, greatly improved since I last saw it (I was directed there by your excellent user page). Rothorpe (talk) 02:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
I do strongly believe that WP:COMMONNAME and the consensus shown already at Talk:Murder_of_Amanda_Dowler should be enough to move the page from "Amanda" to "Milly", but an editor has objected. I don't like her threat of edit warring (in fact, not a threat, she's already done a move) so I've protected the page for a while.
I propose to wait and see if more editors chime in at the talk page - I hope they do - and then find an uninvolved admin to close the discussion and if necessary move the page, in a few days. --Dweller (talk) 09:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
It's up to you now; I gotta run. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 23:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Pick any barnstar you'd like.
Your ce at MoMK but also your good work in this regard on other articles is much appreciated. Thought I had to voice this again and encourage you to keep up the good work. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 20:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Vote
Rothorpe, we need your help deciding wether or not to change 'Creation Science' to 'Creation science'. Here's the link: [2] Wekn reven i susej eht (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Beefheart
I feel certain recent additions have disrupted the quality of the article. I think it needs to be reverted to an earlier stage while retaining a few that are positive. Sir Richardson (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Wolf-Rayet star
RE: "[I]t was the comma that was wrong". After reading the paragraph again, I now realize that you're right! Excuse me for that error -- I had a brain fart! (Note to self: Drink at least two mugs of strong, black coffee before editing Wikipedia articles!) IVAN3MAN (talk) 02:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Merge discussion for Scott Peterson
An article that you have been involved in editing, Scott Peterson, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. pablo 13:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello, dear Rothorpe. Say...Since you are doing such careful work with Stiff Records, maybe you would like to come and give the article at 415 Records a once-over before its debut in mainspace. Four One Five Records was Stiff's American counterpart (started a couple of years later) and Stiff is referenced in the article. The predecessor article is currently being processed at WP:copyright problems, due its having been composed of a copypaste of the entire of one source. I found the copyvio & started a fresh article on the talk/temp page that wikipedia provides for such instances (using the original source as a horse, of course). =D I think it is ready for another set of eyes, if you've got a minute. Cheers! duff 22:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'd be delighted, but can we get Stiff sorted out first? You did well to remove the Pink Fairies puff, but there is no need to say that the first single was a 7-inch vinyl one, as all such were in 1976. Most who arrive at the article will already know that, and I put in a wikilink to single for those that don't (though that article could do with some work). Also, there is no need to say that both tracks were by Nick Lowe, as that too is virtually a given. Rothorpe (talk) 02:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sure! I haven't studied it carefully yet, but I will right now. What your sense of what else needs work here? I disagree about the inclusion of the 7" vinyl bit (I, who arrived here, did not know that all singles were in 1976, and I'm well into my forties), but I don't care enough to argue that point.duff 15:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oh! I forgot to mention that the 415 Records matter was settled yesterday. The original article has been restored, with proper copyright permissions, and is now back in mainspace, also being edited with vigor.duff 15:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK, I'm happy with my rewrite of the Lowe single, hope you will be too & that it addresses the concerns of you youngsters! Rothorpe (talk) 23:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Bohumir Kryl
|
Thanks for you help on Bohumir Kryl. I've made numerous changes, and still plan adding material. However, I would welcome and appreciate your further review. Thanks! 78.26 (talk) 02:45, 20 July 2011 (UTC) |
- Thanks! Your new stuff looks good. I'll be watching. Cheers, Rothorpe (talk) 18:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
We just had an edit conflict at
Gene McDaniels and you got it right. Thanks. I have not been able to verify that he did die today. it sort of rings true, but.... an obit would be nice. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, yes, I was looking for an obit too. Curiously, he was born the day after the more famous Gene who died in 1971. Rothorpe (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes, Gene Vincent. Wonder when Gene Pitney was born? Let's add a link and find out. Carptrash (talk) 18:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Summaries, please!
Rothorpe, your help is appreciated, but would you please be so helpful to include summaries with your edits, especially when these are nigh on invisible in the diffs? Thanks. Superp (talk) 07:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I'm an old geezer of 61, with gammy shoulders. Clicking "m" means "copyedits", so if you're interested in the commas &c I put in & take out, please look for them. In other cases I always provide an edit summary. Rothorpe (talk) 15:15, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, this image has a #15 in the top left corner. Before I take it out I thought that I better check that it is not significant! (The uploader is blocked so cannot be consulted). Best wishes. TerriersFan (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I suspect it's a chart position, so, yes, do take it out. All the best, Rothorpe (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I guess that you are watching this place but, in case that you aren't, you may wish to know it has been substantially expanded from, mainly, a Portuguese language source {ref4). TerriersFan (talk) 21:53, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Just back from England to find typical chaos, desktop not working, etc. Will invesigate when I feel more relaxed. Rothorpe (talk) 14:50, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hope that you had a great break; and I see that you have done some nice work on it already! TerriersFan (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks; well, it's nice to be back. I reckon I've finished with the praia for now. Rothorpe (talk) 16:26, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Curse of the ninth
Thanks for your improvements to the comment I added regarding Sibelius. It is of course true that one does not usually count Kullervo as his first symphony, but it has been suggested that one should – my source is Hurwitz, 'Sibelius Orchestral Works: An Owner's Manual'. Actually he counts the Lemminkäinen Legends as the second, making the Seventh the ninth, which if anything fits the 'curse' paradigm more closely. I thought the Lemminkäinen point of view would be too controversial; clearly I underestimated the potential controversy...
Keep up the good work!
Neurotip (talk) 13:53, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yes, those works are symphony-like, certainly, but I do believe in calling a Seventh a Seventh. Rothorpe (talk) 14:58, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I just wanted to say I was sorry that you got short shrift there, even though I do not think I agreed with you. As a wiki-gnome myself that is the sort of change that I might make and I never think we get as much credit as we should for these microscopic changes. However, hanging hyphens are not that good a change in my opinion as they don't genuinely clarify meaning or prevent ambiguity, and so look over-fussy. Anyway, I came here to suggest raising this at one of our MoS pages, though I am not sure which one that would be. Thanks for all your good work, and take care. --John (talk) 08:41, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'm really surprised that anyone should object to the dangling hyphen, as I think they provide a clue to what follows, as Kenatipo has pointed out, & thus aid readability. But then I did write the hyphen article at Citizendium, so perhaps I'm biased. I was going to have a look at the MoS pages, so thanks for reminding me. And for such a nice note. Rothorpe (talk) 13:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
- Well, it's already there! Under hyphen, and called 'hanging hyphen'. I thought I had already looked.
- "A hanging hyphen is used when two compound modifiers are separated (two- and three-digit numbers, a ten-car or -truck convoy, sloping right- or leftward, but better is sloping rightward or leftward)."
- I notice it says "is used", not "may be used". Rothorpe (talk) 00:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Rothorpe, so far you've cited WP:HYPHEN, Hyphen, the Indiana University Style Guide, OxfordDictionaries.com, common sense and a lifetime of reading experience. Is anyone listening? You must be a born optimist. Good luck! --Kenatipo speak! 02:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Kenatipo, that isn't helpful. Rothorpe, that's interesting. I think I agree with the quote from MoS that it's better to avoid such constructions where possible by rewording. For example, numbers of two and three digits, a ten-vehicle convoy. I think these marks are slightly awkward and there should always be a better way to express the meaning without using it. --John (talk) 03:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- See what I mean, Rothorpe? --Kenatipo speak! 06:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, John is not saying dangling hyphens are wrong, or unnecessary, or that he's never seen them, but that he doesn't like them and prefers to paraphrase. No arguing with that. So how about 'A child of around eight'? Rothorpe (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. May your patience be the seed that next year will produce a harvest thirty-, sixty- or a hundredfold! --Kenatipo speak! 22:58, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, John is not saying dangling hyphens are wrong, or unnecessary, or that he's never seen them, but that he doesn't like them and prefers to paraphrase. No arguing with that. So how about 'A child of around eight'? Rothorpe (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- See what I mean, Rothorpe? --Kenatipo speak! 06:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Kenatipo, that isn't helpful. Rothorpe, that's interesting. I think I agree with the quote from MoS that it's better to avoid such constructions where possible by rewording. For example, numbers of two and three digits, a ten-vehicle convoy. I think these marks are slightly awkward and there should always be a better way to express the meaning without using it. --John (talk) 03:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Rothorpe, so far you've cited WP:HYPHEN, Hyphen, the Indiana University Style Guide, OxfordDictionaries.com, common sense and a lifetime of reading experience. Is anyone listening? You must be a born optimist. Good luck! --Kenatipo speak! 02:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Please be careful not to violate WP:V. If a books title is verifiably "Hipocrite; killer of a man," stating the title is "Hipocrite," is not acceptable behavior. Discuss on talk. Hipocrite (talk) 17:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
What's the procedure on this
Hi - I commented on the page Kanatas Vasilis. I think it lacks notability and violates WP:NOTPROMOTION. I'm not sure of the procedure for new articles like this - should it be proposed for deletion or submitted to an admin to assess? (I'm assuming you know more than I do). Cheers -- Zac Δ talk! 16:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- I know no more than you! But there is an admin I could ask. Rothorpe (talk) 16:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- At the moment, it is probably a WP:CSD as a WP:BLP with no refs William M. Connolley (talk) 17:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. Lacking refs is an issue, but I think it's of more concern that it exists to advertise a book and the comments made about that book are very problematic. I'm not sure I know what to do myself, but I'll add a candidate for speedy deletion tag on the basis of WP:NOTPROMOTION. Probably needs an admin to look at this. -- Zac Δ talk! 08:30, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- At the moment, it is probably a WP:CSD as a WP:BLP with no refs William M. Connolley (talk) 17:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Pedants United
Nice to meet you! Deb (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- Equally. Thanks for putting the tag on the Greek guy. And for an example of really bad pedantry (of the sourcy kind), have a look at Talk:Dwarf planet. Rothorpe (talk) 20:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Courtney Love has been going through a lengthy Good Article review, and is now close to being listed. There now needs to be a bit of tidying up done - trimming some excessive detail, and a bit of copy-editing, as well as building up the lead a bit more. This is one of the top viewed articles on Wikipedia and is on an important yet complex subject. Any assistance, even if only to proof read one of the sections, would be much appreciated. SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Your revert
Hi! Why are there double standards for the MoMK article? When I translate something (faithfully)[edit 454415965], it is promptly reverted. When I take up the matter on the talk page, you (the guy with the max contribs) keep quiet. When I follow the same principle on which my edit was reverted, you promptly revert me. I object to this WP:BULLYING and WP:NOEDIT. Tinpisa (talk) 21:13, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- I haven't been watching the article for a while. What was your objection to the translation? Rothorpe (talk) 21:27, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, TMCK has provided the reason. Sorry! Rothorpe (talk) 21:33, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- There seems to have been some misunderstandings while every one made good faith edits but I guess it's solved and in the past by now. The edit in question can be of course reintroduced with a supporting source supplied (and I think there must be one out there). In any case, there shouldn't be any hard feelings about this. Cheers, TMCk (talk) 00:07, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Ravel not just an Impressionist
Thanks for removing the label from the lead paragraph. I've been pointing out to people for years that much of Maurice Ravel's music was far from Impressionist. :) 118.100.77.30 (talk) 07:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I noticed (with gratitude) your corrections of my typos in the new article on Fauré's String Quartet. I wonder if I can interest you in the peer review of another, more substantial, Fauré article that I put up for PR a few days ago? Quite understand if you haven't time or inclination, but any comments you felt moved to make would be greatly appreciated. Tim riley (talk) 19:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invitation. I'll certainly have a look. Rothorpe (talk) 20:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
- More eagle-eyed work, for which many thanks. (How impossible it is to see the typos in one's own prose!) Any comments on the content, if it interests you, which of course it may not, would be most welcome on the peer review page. Fauré isn't everyone's cup of tea, so I shall perfectly understand if you haven't any comments. I've had my money's worth with your valuable proof-corrections. Tim riley (talk) 16:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
- Glad you approve. Yes, very good article. I used to have a Vox Box 3-LP set with the nocturnes, preludes, etc. I would have removed the accent from 'prélude' by the way, but I suppose that's just a matter of taste. Anyway, always glad to help. Rothorpe (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Cyrillic at Natalie Wood
If you look at biography articles of others who have been given non-English names at birth (take Deepak Chopra and Kal Parekh for just two examples), you will see it is accepted practice and quite appropriate for the cyrillic to be in the opening (biography summary) paragraph. Lhb1239 (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed, it is usual. I was just trying to solve the bracket problem. I think I had in the past erroneously concluded that one couldn't put the date parenthesis inside the standard linguistic one. And, yes, I was going to put a semi-colon there, but was summoned to dinner! All's well that ends well. Rothorpe (talk) 20:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Look at the source not the book. Written by Lee Ritenour and mentions him as among the greats. If Hendrix and Clapton can have "greatest guitarist" in their intro then so can Joe Pass who is like the jazz equivalent.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Preview & edit summaries
Hi. Your edits would be even more useful when seen on a watchlist if you would use preview to avoid multiple trivial edits and provide an edit summary. Thank you. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'll try to remember. Rothorpe (talk) 14:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
- However, you might see my comment in similar circumstances on 1 August, above. As for trivial edits, I'm far too lazy to make any! Rothorpe (talk) 02:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you don't mind in me messaging you. I am keen to drum up some comments and opinions on the above article due to its FAC. So far, it has only received one lot of comments regarding improvements, which have now all been addressed. I notice that we tend to edit the same kind of articles and I would greatly appreciate having your expertise and opinion on it. If you can review the article and comment here then that would be very much appriciated. Also, If you know of anyone else who might be interested in doing so then please share the request. All the best -- Cassianto (talk) 18:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'll certainly have a look. Regards, Rothorpe (talk) 18:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Good luck with it! Rothorpe (talk) 21:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Alpha Gruis
Hello. Well I've been trying to update this article, but your simultaneous edits have created conflict issues. It would have helped it you could have held off your mass copy-edits until I was done. I guess in future I'll have to post a warning template. Regards, RJH (talk) 18:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, I should have noticed. I'll come back later. Rothorpe (talk) 18:29, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi
Hi, I am trying to make the article Amrullah Saleh a good article. User:Jezhotwells made an informal assessment and concluded: Prose: The article is not quite up to the "reasonably well written" standard. Needs a good copy-edit to improve spelling, grammar, word choice. This needs to be done by a third-party with an excellent command of written English. Since I saw you on the article history improving the language, would you have any interest doing that? JCAla (talk) 17:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Hey, thank you very much for going through the whole article and correcting it. Will notice you when I nominate it, okay?!
|
The Working Man's Barnstar |
| For your immediate willingness to help improving the English language of articles and your valuable copyediting work. JCAla (talk) 08:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC) |