User talk:Antandrus/Archive21

Archive of my talk page, 15 March 2007 to 26 April 2007. Please do not edit this page -- I will not see your edit. Go here instead.

Partap Sharma

I've been following your QA survey a bit. I don't even know where to begin with something like Partap Sharma. . . MarkBuckles (talk) 07:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I edited and cut a lot of the WP:NPOV violations in this article. I tell you, I don't know how you take it having ignorant insults and misrepresentations of your righteous actions thrown at you all the time. (what was said at Talk:Partap Sharma is relatively minor compared to some of the ridiculousness I see people post on this page seomtimes). It's hard for me to let it roll off like you seem to do. MarkBuckles (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out! Appreciate it. That's exactly how the project improves its quality. Oh--and as of letting it roll off, I just ignore it. :) Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 16:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

25

Whoa.... you're number 25 in the latest List of Wikipedians by number of edits. Very impressive. Mak (talk) 01:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Michaelquantum

Should I have said anything more?

Michaelquantum (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I ask as you'd previously given him a warning regarding the impersonation. I just don't know if blowing up at him (ala WP:AN/I) is 'yet'? Shenme 06:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

outrage

How can you change [1] back and delete the discussion page. You have only contributed to vandalism by ensuring that non admin users who act within all guidlines are attacked by admins and erased. It ensures that users see the rules as applying only to those without admin rights. I suggest you follow the rules you claim to be enforcing. Helpthisisnotright 01:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should read the rules we have about harassment, sockpuppets, personal attacks, civility, and assuming good faith before you continue with your sockpuppet campaign to harass other users and accuse admins of "abuse".

I use a two-question test to evaluate whether someone is a valid contributor or not. 1) Is this person here to contribute to the encyclopedia? 2) Is this person actively disrupting those of us who are? If the answers are "no" and "yes", respectively, I block the troll, and that's exactly why I blocked you. Nothing is stopping you from creating another account and using it for valid contributions--and that means not attacking or harassing other editors. Thank you for your time, Antandrus (talk) 02:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks ..

.. for reverting the USF vandal who just hit my talk page again. Appreciate it :) - Alison^☺ 23:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy to help! that's the troll that's been harassing Gwernol and others forever. Expect shortly to see a "I'm an important biology professor!" appear on the talk page. LOL. Antandrus (talk) 23:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually kinda looking forward to blocking the guy, seeing as I can now :) He's been hitting my pages since early February - Alison^☺ 23:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!! hadn't been watching RFA today. :) Antandrus (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my the vandalism on my page too. That's actually my first. Well, my first "five" if you count all the edits he made. MarkBuckles (talk) 00:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The very first? Wow. The hazards of issuing "test" messages. Somewhere I read a description of the problem here as "the incessant drizzle of schoolboy vandalism"; being insulted and having your pages vandalized is about as serious as getting a few drops of rain on your hair. Children will continue to be childish, I suppose: and those of us who are adults chuckle and carry on. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Haydn: a probably non-Croatian composer

Thanks, Antandrus, for dealing with that Evergreen Montenegro guy editing Joseph Haydn. He seems to have backed off.

It reminds me of the frustrating time I used to have editing Haydn and folk music a few years ago -- some nationalist Croatian editor did all sorts of silly stuff, like looking up and counting all the Hajdin's in the Croatian telephone directory. Cheers, Opus33 03:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Do you know much about Gregor Werner?

I have backed down. I too agree these silly edit wars are a waste of time. But one has to admit isn't it slighty odd that Joseph Haydn was born among the Croatian community who settled in Austria, spoke Croatian, was influenced by Croatian music (some 30 songs)and is believed to be Croat by other websites and books. Why does Wikipedia hide this?

Eg Look at soccer player Andreas Ivanschitz who is a Austrain International. He's got a Croat origin and guess what he's real name isn't Ivanschitz. Ivanschitz is Austrosized from a Croat name Ivancic. So to have Hajdin a Croat name changed into Haydn is not unusual.

Enjoy the music

Evergreen Montenegro1 04:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK FAIR ENOUGH,

Understand now. People assume him as Croat because some strong evidence points in that direction. Still intersting enough to note in the article i think. His Croatian influence that is. The fact he spoke Croatian is one huge factor. I have asked another user about it User Kubura.

I still think the chances of the Hajdin and Haydn last names being linked are still high, if not for him but for other Croats in Austria..

No way would anyone think Ivanschitz is of Croat origin, but when you look into it you find out.

History is all about pov to me. I think a Russian historian would have a different view to WW2 than the American. So to say Haydn wasn't Croatian could well be one such diff pov

Take Care Evergreen Montenegro1 04:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I think my prior word sounded a tad negative to u, so i changed it. History is pov ...each and every country in the world has a bias to history and how they contributed. I think some historians would prefer Haydn to be Austrian and will go to great lengths to have people believe it. Still the fact Haydn spoke Croatian is hard to cover up.

Evergreen Montenegro1 03:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

sorry

look i'm really sorry about that warning you had to give me, won't happen again!

New list

Hey Antandrus - do you think this list I've begun working on is feasible and appropriate to Wikipedia? See User:Makemi/Workspace2. Cheers, Mak (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey I just commented about this on Mak's page, but since I know you love Beethoven, the list made me think of an article by Barry Cooper titled "Beethoven’s Appoggiatura’s: long or short?" that I'd like to recommend to you. It may be old hat to you, but I was really enthralled. MarkBuckles (talk) 06:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually I haven't read it ... kind of frightened to, since I'm so ingrained in my habits. I don't play them all the same way; depends on the context. This kind of stuff is so hard to write about on Wikipedia, the things you have spent a lifetime learning to do but have trouble sourcing exactly where you learned them. Where is the article published? Antandrus (talk) 06:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Early Music, XXXI (2003) p. 165-78. He demonstrates that many of them should last longer than how they are commonly played, depending on the situation in which they arise. I found the evidence and examples pretty compelling. MarkBuckles (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for getting the vandalism on my User page. ♦^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 20:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Let me know if that one bothers you again. Antandrus (talk) 20:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks from me as well. --Wafulz 03:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! Saturday night=trolls. Always seems to be that way. Antandrus (talk) 03:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Just to let you know that your talk page will never be vandalized again because all the IP addresses used to vandalize your talk page, got blocked from editing and your talk page has been semi-protected. Thanks to User:Betacommand, you will get to rest more often. Amos Han^{Talk to me./Contribs)} 02:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Possibly Unjustified Block

Hi, I was about to warn IP User:88.110.7.181 for vandalism on your talk page when I looked at the block log, noticing that you have blocked the IP after one edit, who has received Zero warnings or messages on their talk page, at the time. While the IP's edits on your talk page are clearly considered deliberate attempts to comprimise the integrity of your talk page and Wikipedia, I don't see more severity in the case, like blatant personal attacks, defamatory edits, trolling, etc. Please forgive if it's not my place to comment on this. I know about vandalism, but I was told warnings are nessesary before blocking, execpt in extreme cases, and I didn't see what was extreme about the IP's edit one edit, as well as the importance of assuming good faith in others.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

That was because it was his first edit at that IP address. He has many thousands of edits, all of which are trolling and vandalism since sometime in February. I'm all for assuming good faith. Answered more fully on your talk page. Antandrus (talk) 03:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, what threw me off, is usually admins. explain that it's a sock of a banned user in their block log.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... that particular range (Tiscali) is highly dynamic, and he'll never get the same IP twice. I usually don't put too much info in the block log since then the next person who gets the IP might see it; I also use only short blocks (usually three hours, though I think I used a couple that were 24 at first). It's different for static IPs. Also for persistent trolls sometimes I use just a "..." summary in the spirit of WP:DENY. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 03:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh I see. A banned user using IP ranges, and the IP I am talking about is just part of one range, but the person, whoever he/she is editing under, has been warned and contines(kind of like with Cplot). I don't really understand how IP ranges work. I'm sorry about that mistake, and my patience would have been well past if I were you. Before, I'm the one who has assumed zero good faith in others who appear to vandalize, and have worked to improve on that mistake.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for the note, and happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 03:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I know you worked very hard and the vandalism on your talk page gave you an even harder time, but I still see you working hard. Amos HanTalk to me./Contribs) 03:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I also gave a barnstar to User:Betacommand as well for protecting your talk page. Amos Han^{Talk to me./Contribs)} 03:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

George Szell page

Hi there, me again. Hoping your spring has sprung well so far. It's beginning to get there, a little, up here in America's Tailpipe. Now then: There is a dispute simmering on the Szell talk page about his name. Some feel it should be George plain & simple and some feel he has to be Gyorgy, "perhaps better knkown as" or something along those lines. I fall into the George camp; that "perhaps" sounds very weaselly to me. You have any opinions or advice? Merci! --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 12:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Robert Schumann

I wonder what is causing the upsurge in vandalism to his page?!? Thanks for watching it while I was out this afternoon. :) I assume you have it on your watchlist? ;) —  $PЯINGrαgђ  23:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Delinquents wearing panties, perhaps? :P —  $PЯINGrαgђ  23:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Santa Cruz Biotechnology

You wrote:

"disagree about being speediable; google it' well-written stub"

No arguments, the stub is well-written, however, well-written or not, the article qualifies for speedy deletion as an article because it is both unremarkable and uncontroversial. Per the speedy deletion criteria page: " Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content. An article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If controversial, or if there has been a previous AfD, the article should be nominated for AfD instead." That being said, I hope you won't object to my re-adding the {{db-corp}} tag. If you do, I'll follow a non-speedy deletion process instead. —XSG 03:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be reasonable to take it to AfD, as a very reasonable user has contested the speedy deletion, who has no conflict of interest. You can see that it have a lot of google hits, it not being highly promotional should not automatically lead to its deletion in this case. Mak (talk) 03:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to be contrary, but I'd like to point out that if you go past the first page or two of Google hits, the number drops from 1,340,000 hits to 156 hits. For example [2]. That being said, I think measuring notability by Google results is as flawed as Google apparently is in this case. I personally don't think 156 external hits to a business really constitutes notability for an organization. I hope you'll agree with me. If you do agree with me, I'll re-add the db-corp template. If you still don't agree, I'll go the AfD route. —XSG 04:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Also in the interest of full disclosure and a modicum of pride: I'm a Google employee, and I did not alter any settings to cause the results to appear in this manner. In fact, I'll be filing it as a bug as soon as I get into the office tomorrow. ;) —XSG 04:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

That's probably the right thing to do, if you wish, since this is already reading like (an exceptionally civil!) deletion discussion. I see some extremely prestigious journals in those 156 hits--nature.org, journals.cambridge.org, nih.gov, biochemj, oxfordjournals.org. It's not quite like the two-kid skateboarding promoter I deleted the other day. --And you work for Google?? Cool! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 04:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars are cool and all that, but...

A nice handwritten (sic) note is better. Sometimes when I get bored, I say to myself, "Hey, why not go read ten random articles that Antandrus has written?" Fifty blue links and 3 hours later, I leave satisfied. Thanks for your work. Teke 05:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

The edits you reverted.

I noticed that you have reverted a lot of edits by User:Ruraloccur. The edits you reverted apear to be good edits. Some of the versions you reverted them to look like vandalism. Would please explain this? -Mschel 03:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've finished fixing them. Look at his history: [3] A couple of us spotted him doing this [4] in his recent edits, so we rolled back them all.

Once in a while a particularly nasty vandal goes on RC-patrol, reverting ten or twenty vandalisms, and then turns into a vandal account. The result is that the admin rolling the person back inadvertently restores vandalism on some of the edits. It should be corrected now. Looks like I missed one, which Camerong fixed. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 03:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for quickly spotting the vandalism to my user page. -Mschel 04:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome--and thanks for fixing Squeak's! Antandrus (talk) 04:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Zuiderzee Works

You watching the page, too? Bo-Lingua

Pierre Moulu

Ihr Deutsch ist wunderbar. Your landscape even greater. de:Benutzer:Roomsixhu

Danke! Pleased to meet you! I clarified a few things in Pierre Moulu as well.  :) Antandrus (talk) 02:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

My version is now corrected :-D. I left a last question about saints at Moulus talk --Roomsixhu —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.187.46.22 (talk) 19:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

Category:Prison writings

You effectively proposed this category at Infelix ego, so I thought you'd want to know that I created it today and attempted to populate it. Wareh 19:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Gratitude

Thanks for the revert on my user page!--Xnuala (talk) 16:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:OWB

Thank you!! Much appreciate the compliment. Yes, the only reason I keep it in user space is because I wanted it to represent a personal POV -- rather like Raul's Laws (even though others have added to those). I think I started the page in response to the repetitive situation I'd seen of good editors eventually getting fed up and flaming out -- leaving the project in anger -- and not recognizing that this is just the "narrative curve" of all human experience. I'm increasingly thinking that the future of Wikipedia depends on us understanding and managing conflict in the community, as it gets larger. Cheers and thanks again, Antandrus (talk) 17:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Tend to concur with your leanings... which is why I asked for the straw poll last week (VPP-policy. Search 'FrankB') on some of the so called perennial proposals which I feel would serve to mitigate many frictions, and make things more deliberative and reasoned. The current way of doing business is disheartening to those of us with limited time... much to much geared to people without a life off-line. Now that the projects grown to a good size, it needs refined and 'matured', and my analysis means that means we need to conduct business differently. For example, I started WP:TSP because I see a great deal of wasted time over taking away tools from one editor --Or at least, not cost others time -- when t'would be best to leave things in the status quo ante, as well as the obvious benefits of having the same tools in the box if one contributes across project lines. To me the big problem is organizing the documentation and letting others know the tools are about. Cheers! // FrankB 20:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the rvv on my page! Crested Penguin 00:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome--happy to help; let me know if he bothers you again. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 00:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Problem

The main problem is Wikipedia is free to edit but at the same time some people police the pages as if they were some sort of sheriff. It's a bit of a joke. If Joseph Haydn, Marco Polo etc...have some link to Croatia I think this needs to be mentioned. It's just silly not to.

Eg Diego Maradona has Croatian blood, his grandmother was born on Korcula(Dalmatia-Croatia) and went to live in Argentina. Diego has a daughter and mother named Dalma, named after the the Dalmatian coast. Now when someone added this under Trivia in Diego's article it was deleted.

Why? If we have proof ..add to article end of story. We have proof that Haydn and Polo has Croatian blood, why hide it???

Evergreen Montenegro1 03:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The key is, as you say yourself, "if we have proof." However, by Wikipedia's own original research policy, we are not the ones to make that determination: we have to use what is on other sources. Recent scholarly studies on Haydn debunk the 100-year-old theory of his being Croatian. Now I am not an expert on this particular topic--I'm more interested in his musical style and influence than his nationality--but if you can find a reliable recent source to back up his having Croatian ancestry, by all means bring it up on the talk page of the article. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 04:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Sylvia Mendez

Thanks, I read about her yesterday and I told myself "Tony, you've got to let the world know about this person" so I went and wrote the article. Just goes to show you, the Civil Rights movement was not only an Afro-American thing, it involved many people of all races. Cheers! Tony the Marine 02:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oh yeah, I forgot to present you with your WoH plaque.

Wall of Honor
Antandrus

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, Antandrus/Archive21, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

-Mschel 12:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

QuasyBoy

Thanks for removing vandalism from my user page, I greatly appreciate it. QuasyBoy 11:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank 'ee kindly!

Nice to know somebody cares. --Orange Mike 01:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

You're both welcome: happy to help. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 5 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Missa L'homme armé super voces musicales, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 09:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Another question

Do you know why the text at Talk:Iran is screwed up? The Behnam 05:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Definitely worked. Thanks a lot. Considering my most recent foolish ANI report, I guess this all shows that I really don't understand the technical stuff! Oh well. The Behnam 05:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor

Hi Antandrus! I just noticed that you had reverted some recent vandalism to Leonardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor. Well, you missed the preceding bit of vandalism, which was really much more entertaining! --Amandajm 12:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see. Thanks for catching it! Antandrus (talk) 14:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Akhilleus

Akhilleus gets new weapons.

Archive21, thanks for your support in my successful RfA. As the picture shows, the goddesses have already bestowed my new weapons, which I hope to use to good effect. If you ever need assistance, or want to give me feedback on my use of the admin tools, please leave me a message on my talkpage. --Akhilleus (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry!

I left for a sec to get something to eat and my sister started doing random vandalization.Doody 09 05:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Counter vandalism

I just wanted to say thank you for doing the good job on counter vandalism and spotting the edits to my user page, quite a few socks eh? :) (please reply on my page thank you) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 05:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Orbicle and copyvios

Hi. I was just pointed to this. Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Plagiarism_and_copyright_infringement_denied ? I think that we might have a big mess. Jkelly 02:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheers

Heh, thanks for this. Made me laugh :) – Riana ^ऋ 01:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting vandalism on my page. Makgraf 01:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! Let me know if the vandal bothers you again. Antandrus (talk) 01:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

You have the speed to fight 'em

I have a broadband connection, but lately this evening you always beat me to the punch against vandalism such as this. Maybe it is time to upgrade from Popups. Thanks for the vandal fighting you do. Cheers! JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 01:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to sound like Larry the Cable Guy, but when I got broadband, which was my upgrade from dial-up, I was happier than a tornado in a trailer park… LOL! Ha Ha… Take care - JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 02:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't me...

Antandrus - My account, crewsd, was being used by my friend so I gave her the password. She went around doing random crap to pages then after she deleted the wiki on Jesus she told me what she did. It wasn't really me... Crewsd 01:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

back in action?

Lucycl0ver (talk · contribs) removed the {{ifd}} from one of the images, and then added {{pp-usertalk}} to their own talk page. That didn't take long. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 03:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The Orbicle case

I have misgivings about the way the Orbicle case is being handled. Judging by La muette de Portici, editors are now searching through any article Orbicle contributed to, looking for similarities in phrasing to published sources, not just outright plagiarism of whole paragraphs. Is this intended? Does WP have a practical definition of plagiarism, and if so was Orbicle told about it? I see you are involved. Doubtless you know much more about the case than I do. Am I wrong to be concerned? - Kleinzach 10:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for restoring my talk page. --Ann Stouter 18:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Me, too

Thanks for tending to the vandalism on my user page. I've been knocking down a lot of vandalism- and garbage-filled new pages lately, and I get a fair amount of this kind of stuff. Thankfully, bots usually get to it before I even see it. Realkyhick 05:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Josquin FAC

Man you're quick! I was just about to leave you a message about the nomination, and you beat me to it. I see we keep similar hours as well :-). I felt it was time to bypass your modesty. I hope the process provides you with well-deserved recognition and minimal headaches.

I did have one or two thoughts anticipating FAC comments:

• Actually I think four images, including the musical examples, is pretty good, esp. for such an elusive subject. Maybe one could be moved to the left for visual variety? If there's a free photo somewhere of his graffito from the Vatican, though, that would be beyond cool.
• I went through and did a quick copyedit, mostly for style wrt to <ref> tags, per WP:FOOT (ie they should be after punct. marks, with no intervening space). However my old browser cuts off long pages in the edit window, so I can't edit the whole page at once w/o destroying it. Consequently I can't get to the lead section, which you might want to do a quick cleanup on... (been taken care of)
• Also some might consider the lead a bit long; on my browser I have to scroll down to see the beginning of the TOC, which I think is usually regarded as undesirable. Maybe some of the material could be moved, either to a sub-lead for "Life" or to "Music and influence/Overview"?
• Lastly, I've heard tell that the FAC process dislikes red-links, so it may be worth either de-linking some stuff for now or creating quickie stubs (maybe just 1 sentence & the text for the pieces?). I went ahead and created a stub for rondeau (music) (completely out of my old Harvard Dict.) which you could probably improve upon...

There, now that I've heaped work upon you :-)...

Good luck. I haven't checked out this process before, so I'm curious...—Turangalila ^talk 06:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I know someone who owns the copyright to a photo of the graffito, I'll see if he'll upload it.

Two things which I think need to be done, and I can help with, are adding references to editions for the pieces (i.e., where can we find each piece in the Josquin editions) and bulking up the bibliography a bit. Congrats on the nomination, Antandrus, and Turangalila. --Myke Cuthbert 18:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

You asked on my talk page if I could find "consensus" on which pieces are by Josquin and which aren't? My goodness! I'm a musicologist not a miracle worker!  :)

The graffiti aren't visible from the ground--you need permissions to go up to the loft to take the photos. To me, it's not that convincing, but it is definitely a great image. The ones I have are a little blurry, but fine for 300x200 or whatnot. I don't have the big book of Josquin. --Myke Cuthbert 18:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Promoted! Mazeltov. (I don't see the star on the article yet though, is there a ceremony? ;-) ) —Turangalila _talk 05:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Did you know?

On 13 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Missa de Beata Virgine, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Josquin

It's almost less confusing in original notation.

I remembered the prolation Agnus being really funky in original notation from my Renaissance music performance practice class, so I dug around a bit and found it. Too bad the scan isn't great. I really need to buy the Odhecaton one of these days. I'm working on a recording, but it isn't working thus far. At first I think I was trying to do it way to fast. Greg thinks you should get some men to do it instead :) Mak (talk) 02:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Vote?

Hello Antandrus,

I seem to have gotten into an imbroglio at

http://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music#Instrumentation

Could you perhaps enter a vote?

Yours very truly, Opus33 03:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

User:IchbinIch is a sock

Hi there. The user's contribs indicate a sock of user:Ichträgtkeineschuhe. I've placed a {{sockpuppet}}-blocked tag on user's page. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 05:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, looking at the history of his contributions, Yamla's page, and the others, I agree. Antandrus (talk) 05:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Instrumentation

Thanks, Antandrus. I think you are right; one should use discretion and taste everywhere, and it's not really possible to formulate a standard for these. I likewise was not pleased by the idea of voting on this issue, but since it came up I'd rather vote than not.

Cheers, Opus33

Fastest watchlist in the West...

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		goes to Antandrus for his continual display of the Fastest Watchlist in the West – particularly in the completion of a 30kb archive a whopping six minutes after it was requested. —Turangalila talk 07:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

There, my first barnstar...I feel silly as a newbie giving it to a veteran, but this is pretty impressive. Just awarding this thing took me an hour...—Turangalila ^talk

I'll second the motion. :) —  $PЯINGrαgђ  14:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!! :) Antandrus (talk) 15:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected ...

... for a day per WP:RPP request and to save you the bother doing it yourself :). This is the same vandal who hit my talk page last week. Juvenile in the extreme - Alison^☺ 23:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Giuseppe Fiorini

Thank you for your concern. I would like to point out that the page is written with User:Florenus, who happens to be the publisher and creator of the originating text [5] | [6]. I think it is the other person who is in violation of copyright of that text, for he printed the text without any permission.

If you notice, JS wrote where the text came from - Notes from Il Suono di Bologna - The Sound of Bologna Exibition of which [Florenus] is the owner and William Henley, The Universal Dictionary of Violin and Bowmakers. Feel free to ask Florenus The Author of Il Suono di Bologna questions regarding that page and the information. He has also posted the nice photos of Fiorini on the wikipage. As I said it before, we are trying to expand the Lutherie section of wiki, and many well know authors and publishers in the field are getting involved. Thank you. No Copyright violations hereMilliot 05:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

i've been trying for some time to help him out and monitor his edits. he seems like a nice guy, but he needs allotta-lotta help from everyone...i canna doit alone. --emerson7 | Talk 05:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: List of compositions by Ludwig van Beethoven

Thought you might like to know: I submitted a Featured List Nomination for this list, of which you seem to be a major author. I did some tinkering around the edges (lead, references, section headers, etc.) first. Cheers! —Turangalila ^talk 01:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

????????

Re: My links on "Love at First Sight" identified as "spam"

To whomever: My links are not spam. They are not to be removed and identified as SPAM. Thank you for your "warning." Please advise the user in question that my "links" are not spam. I have linked to my own Web sites, none of which have any commercial purpose. I own the copyright of all the materials on my Web sites, several of which have been linked by others from Wikipedia.

Please contact me via e-mail. My own "vision of love at first sight" on what are carefully designed, general audience pages with no commercial purpose do not deserve such a designation.

I will rename all of the files that others have linked to my other Web pages and "ignore" you, otherwise. The success of Wikipedia will be found in the willingness of other users to carefully consider the outcome of their actions. One outcome for this Web Site may catch you, whoever you are, by surprise. The Web is a truly shared resource, but netranges are all owned. Wikipedia owns none of these ranges, the last time that I checked.

I will add one or two other links to this page that point to other Web sites, and see what you do.

Later... Links, lovely ones at that, gone. The pages are, on the other hand, forever, as are the memories.

Columba Kos entretours@w3terra.net —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Columba-kos (talk • contribs).

Note this edit left in your archive [7] Mak (talk) 01:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Mail You have mail. Mak (talk) 03:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Since I trust my comments here are my own to "edit," here's a "word" for you.

am.biq.u.ous \ am-'biq.yu.wus \ adj \ (2006) 1. a: identifiable as evil beyond a shadow of a doubt b: an object or medium created to damage a person or perception 2. capable of being understood as inobscure in its misconstruction. am.biq.u.ous.ly adv - am.biq.u.ous.ness n

h t t p : / / a m b i q u o u s.n e t ambiquous recondite

You are hardly the final word on any subject. And, I expect, never the "first." But Ambiquous is my word. Not at all to be confused with ambiguous. Perhaps it is not pertinent here, or perhaps it lies somewhere at the interstice of nomothetic and idiographic.

c-k

láska na první pohled - free to all, but obscure to most. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Columba-kos (talk • contribs).

You are free to feel that way if you wish. I am here to build an encyclopedia, and part of that job involves removing the clutter left by people who are here for other purposes, such as self-promotion. If that activity is "pathetic" to you, then I suggest finding a less "pathetic" place to promote yourself. Most sincerely, Antandrus (talk) 04:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Dear Antandarus: Were I interested in "self-promotion," I would have used my own name. As it is, I had no objective in mind when I entered the links that I did for [h t t p://c h r a n e n k a.net chranenka] or others. When I later added links to [h t t p ://m a e v e -m o d e l.net] Maeve Coughlan's or [h t t p : / / s a b r i n a - m o d e l . n e t] Sabrina Gotman's memorial pages to indicate the profundity of love at first sight, and, most notably, how it can extend very easily to those dearly departed, only to see them removed, I knew that I was witnessing a depressing double standard at work. Wikipedia is dependent on the good intentions of anonymous participants such as myself. NASTY QUIP SNIPPED

Hi, we are an encyclopedia, not a link repository. "Good intentions" are a red herring. All people adding links to their pet websites have "good intentions." All people adding pages on themselves have "good intentions." We have policies that we have developed over the course of many years which guide our actions here. Please read our external links policy and quit making this into an ad hominem case against me, or other administrators. And please do not make personal attacks.

I am quite aware of your activity for the last several days, and was hoping you would stop, but apparently you haven't given up trying to insert links to your sites. Pages like Dearly loved one are inappropriate for an encyclopedia. ...Antandrus

Columba Replied, was excised, and replies again...

No more or less than many other pages found here. Perhaps you should make improvements to "Dearly loved one" if you have the heart for it.

In addition, I take your final sentence as a threat that we will have something other than "peace within our time" if I continue to uphold Wikipedia policy and remove your external links, yes? Like the threat you made here? Do you understand that this is not acceptable behavior on Wikipedia? Antandrus (talk) 00:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Columba again

Erm... rather aggressive in that last edit. Some people never learn. Those are my words, Ant... My comments. All saved Truth? I like most of what I find here. But I'm as sensitive as you are on the subject of being identified as spam. Not one of my pages need be so identified. If they were spam, I would not have pictures of my dearly loved ones at the top of the search engine image results, To wit:

My girl side by side with another eternal girl, Canadian super model in the making, Darla Baker.

Links excised:

Now Antandrus. I could do what I suggested. Lead you down the garden path to the editing hell place. Pull a favour out of the hat of ole Beelzebumbum 'imself. Single message left out there. I don't want to. But I could. My name is Nicky Haflinger. I punch code the way some others eat salty french fries at McObese Restaurant.

But on the personal links subject: Please note. Domain names are the soul of w3, and will last as long as they are renewed. Men poches sont deepo, peepo. Don't you know? The world is full of messed up shiggies that do spam messages to make money as an alternative to working the car parks. Perhaps they lack the allure, or possibly, have contracted something. As for you, and your reaction to my words. Please, let it go. Why object to my contributions and remove all of the positive ones out of spite. I'm not interested in making any point, by the way, except perhaps that the quality of love is unquantifiable. Your only alternative at this point is to avoid the subject altogether and remove the bland reference to the subject made by some other contributor... "Love at first sight."

meta name="description" content="Ashley Loves Forever Darla and it was Love at first sight, Láska na první pohled, Le coup de foudre, Leibe auf den ersten Blick. Leave these matters to Ashley Struan. There's a cat who knows something about the subject without having to make references to make a point. Worthy of research? No, love is something that you have, or don't. Ask anybody who suffers from the unrequited version. It's in the eyes.

Why play games? I am hardly some barely literate stooge whose words are truly spam. Since there's no way that you could have checked all of the list of links, I can only assume that you just deleted them without analysing them.

Mail

You have mail. Mak (talk) 03:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

So are you going to read our policies, as I have suggested, or continue to try to make this about me?

I'm an administrator here. One of the things I do is remove links which are not in compliance with our policy on external links. I also remove personal attacks from my talk page. OK? Are you going to look at our policies and try to see what being a Wikipedia contributor is truly about, or continue to list all the things wrong with me, and the drugs I ought to be taking? Antandrus (talk) 01:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

c-k replies:

OF course, I have read your policies. But they are very obscure. Hard to follow, even after repeated analysis.

I took the drug references out. But, clonazepam is a truly luxy drug. Almost as good as c-sati, and relatively cheap.

And what's wrong with the occasional external link on these pages? I suppose the alternative is to upload pictures, and I will do so. As an endnote, "Dearly loved one" has no external links, except to a page where the words will last forever. Just like a good love story.

And, don't worry about the threats thing. Wouldn't do this to you. There are too many truly evil types to contend with. Just a complaint, in the finale, about being misidentified.

Let it go. I won't say that I'm desperate to, but this is getting a bit lame.

c-k a.s.s. x-s and many other 'avatars.'

Words being Edited

Antandrus: Since only you can edit these words (I trust), then my point is made. Suggest that my contents on the Slean page are not to be second-guessed, and that Dearly loved one's excision was an error on your part, but that is moot.

x-s/c-k —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xena starwoman (talk • contribs) 17:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Antandrus: Silly to think that you can "block" me.

I think that you have earned an "ambiquous" entry.

CAM_Pardal

a.k.a. Pardál obláčkový měří asi metr a má poměrně dlouhý ocas. Jeho krátké nohy prozrazují, ... Tento pardál je jako vzácnost chován v pražské zoologické zahradě. ...

navzdy dot cz

See you in the search engine results...

And to think I wrote you such a nice message.

PLUS: I will contact Sarah Slean. Perhaps she will "add the external link" to her own page. OR will that be a case of double spamming?

Haven't checked the Brave New Waves Komoda/MacDonald/Mackenzie link but since it is one of a kind, on a page that has no outside links, it could hardly be worthy of deletion.

Upcoming...

Well, Charles/Ashley/Xena/Columba, I will be putting up no hate sites about you, nor calling you "pathetic", "petty", "mediocre", or other nasty names, nor suggesting drugs you need to take, nor vandalizing pages with threats of retaliation, -- all things you have done here. I do not need to do those things: I choose to live my life to an ethical standard in which that kind of behavior is off limits. If you want to be a Wikipedia contributor, all you have to do is understand a few basic things, such as our policies, most of which are variations on the golden rule. Treat other people respectfully; do not promote yourself, your ideas, your friends, your websites (it's called conflict of interest); maintain a neutral point of view; and this one -- don't be a dick. And no, I will do no off-line negotiations with you for ways for you to violate our policies, so expect no replies to your e-mail. Thank you, Antandrus (talk) 05:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply: I hope you will acknowledge that I have already taken some measures to not be a dick. After all, I snipped some quips, particularly the "pathetic" references. Truth? I was listening to Robert Fripp and the League of Gentlemen at the time.

Pathetic little recording. Abandon It.

...

More good advice could hardly... (etc)

PSST... The ambiquous reference? Why, these words, silly goose!

x-star (Blame it a ACGT)

Messed up shiggy, by own admission

BUT: You must admit that "Love at First Sight" piece is on the tripe side of the $E=mc2$

Thanks

Antandrus - thanks for reverting Columba-kos's vandalism to my user page. NYArtsnWords 15:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Gracias

Thanks for reverting my usertalk page! VanTucky 18:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome: my pleasure! Antandrus (talk) 18:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity

How often do you archive your talk page? —  $PЯINGrαgђ  18:19, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I certainly agree. Werdnabot does a fine job, but I do better. :P And yeah, I usually wait until 26 headings there and then archive, leaving one left. That way I don't have a completely empty page…somebody I know will be glad to know that. :P —  $PЯINGrαgђ  18:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Unrelated: I see you blocked Symphony in A Major. Won't Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Saint-Saëns and Shostakovich all be mad. :P —  $PЯINGrαgђ  20:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

LOL. And Bruckner. Funny, you never hear the 6th much.  :) Antandrus (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheri DiNovo person

Yeah, I think I started watching them because Bearcat posted something on WP:ANI a couple of months ago. I'm trying to spread the word so people will stop bother trying to warn them, and just revert, block, ignore. I sent an abuse report to Truenet (where a lot of the vandalism is coming from in the last week) but I haven't heard back yet. Natalie 19:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

• Thanks for reverting vandalism in my user page. Isilanes 00:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Quick Draw McGraw

My friend you are like a competent QDM! You beat me 7/10 times! ;) "01:46, April 24, 2007 Antandrus (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "ALandlord (contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite (vandalism-only account) (Unblock)" KOS | talk 01:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Because whacking the vandals is the only form of payment we get? lol I've been forgetting to sign my comments, I've been away for far to long! KOS | talk 01:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Time for aliens.

I don't like to say this, but you may want to change your block from 6 months to indefinite. See this edit; I think that user is the Mr. Oompapa vandal that's been going around recently. Acalamari 16:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and you're welcome. :) I am glad I was able to be of some use there! Acalamari 16:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks

... for reverting my talk page :-) --Caltas 17:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome!  :) Antandrus (talk) 17:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Need your help on something

Would you delete this: User:Junglecat/Isreal. User:PatPeter created it for me and I didn't notice the spelling error. Nothing links to it. Thanks - JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 00:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks... JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 00:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

semiprotection guidelines

Dear Antandrus -- would you consider Medieval music or clarinet candidates for semi-protection? It seems like they're vandalized several times a week and over 75% of non-revert edits are vandalism. I know you're a major anti-vandal (do you have room on your barn for another star?) so I trust your judgment on these things. --Myke Cuthbert 00:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)