User talk:4meter4

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Krakoa 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/Krakoa (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Hi @4meter4:, could you please create an article for American actor Si Jenks who had starring roles in films such as The Rider of the Law, Oregon Trail, The Cowboy Star, Zorro's Black Whip, The Great Train Robbery and has already an article in the French Wikipedia? 190.219.168.53 (talk) 07:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Westman (2nd nomination) as "keep". Have you reconsidered yet? I just wondered whether your closure was correct. From reading the discussion, I thought "delete" and "keep" votes were close. I just hope your close wasn't a supervote, was it? George Ho (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Almost forgot: why do you think the discussion was relisted twice? --George Ho (talk) 20:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think there was a clear shift in consensus supporting keeping the article after the sources provided by Sportsfan. There’s a stronger policy based argument on the keep side that is supported with evidence. Best.4meter4 (talk) 02:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How were Sportsfan's arguments convincing? I mean, what about my replies to Sportsfan? George Ho (talk) 03:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence presented by sportsman demonstrated that the subject was covered for more than one event and across a WP:SUSTAINED period of time which essentially discredited the WP:BLP1E argument and provided evidence the subject passes WP:BASIC. Other commenters also stated similar opinions in the AFD; enough that it appears to be the consensus view. This is what I said in my close and you aren’t going to get a different opinion here. See WP:STICK.4meter4 (talk) 15:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey User:4meter4, I also wanted to comment of your close on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Westman (2nd nomination). In my opinion, this is a WP:BADNAC, because the discussion was controversial (many participants, multiple relists). Let admins take the heat for closing these type of discussions! Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 22:11, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. Although I doubt an admin would come to a different conclusion in their close. The only other viable close option would be no consensus which would end in the same result (ie no deletion or redirect). There clearly was not enough support for a delete or a redirect close by both a vote count and the strength of the arguments. The arguments for deletion/redirect was greatly weakened by the sourcing evidence demonstrating WP:SUSTAINED coverage across more than one event that would pass WP:GNG/WP:BASIC. Feel free to take it to deletion review. Best.4meter4 (talk) 02:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first relisting occurred due to !keep votes earlier then not being convincing enough. One of later !keep votes after second relisting I sometimes have issues with only because I've not seen them prove significance of Westman's HvV gameplay. How about "no consensus" then? That way, I don't have to take this to DRV. George Ho (talk) 07:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly forgot: If you change to "no consensus", can you alter your rationale as well? George Ho (talk) 11:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not altering the close as I believe I accurately summarized community consensus as keep based on both majority input and the strength of the arguments. You may take this to WP:DRV to seek a different outcome.4meter4 (talk) 14:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Took the AFD discussion to Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 March 28. George Ho (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March songs

my story today

thank you for what you did for La fanciulla! - sharing impressions from vacation on Madeira 20-30 March, pics now at 25 March with ups and downs and two cats --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Smerus I met is too intelligent to leave Wikipedia over one opera infobox. I imagine that Chopin hurt him more, and the obvious tendency. What makes me so sad is that there was a time when he accepted the compromise that Brian Boulton added to Chopin, as consensus. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

happy to see that Smerus has edited --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Portland Chamber Music Festival has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, no particular claims to notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. User:Namiba 19:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention Namiba. I added sources for verification purposes; although I did not write any of the text currently in the article. The festival is regularly covered in New England based media. There are lots of reviews in Portland and Boston based media, so I don't think meeting WP:GNG is an issue. I suspect a coi editor may have written the overly promotional text currently in the article. You might check for copyright infringement on the text...4meter4 (talk) 22:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)I'm afraid the last two paragraphs were copied verbatim from the organization's history page, according to Earwig. I've therefore removed them. Thanks for adding sources 4meter4. Clearly notable topic. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:02, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is [2] any use to you? Could also get a higher-resolution fat version, but it seems... A little like encouraging her critics. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP!} 13:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden Thank you for another positive image. Sadly, most of the published scholarship on Turcotti is about her weight. Over half of her biographical entry in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians is focused on her size and the negative comments about her weight. That entry also failed to name a single opera she she performed in. There are also a good number of opera history texts with the Zanetti image which widely focus on Turcotti and her weight. In short, it’s the thing every academic publication on the singer has focused on. There’s also quite a lot of scholarship dedicated to even more nasty quotes that are weight related in critical reviews, as well as a number of devastatingly mean comments about her weight in private letters written by her colleagues and employers. A lot more has been written on this topic in academic books used in the article, and I really only provided the brief highlights. There are whole letters for example by Mingotti and Pirker which have been analyzed in scholarship to write about Turcotti and her career. I had to really dig to find other kinds of information on this person, and had to look to sources with basically cast listings of operas to find other materials because all of the biographical RS in academic publications were largely focused on her weight, and sadly not so much on her substantial contributions to 18th century opera in Italy. I am confident that no source but Wikipedia has such a flattering and positive portrait of the singer, as this at least had pulled together sources to mention her appearances in original opera productions by important composers; something academic biographical entries on the singer have largely overlooked.4meter4 (talk) 17:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 4meter4, in your good and welcome article on Turcotti you write she was a “gifted singer of coloratura”, but this styling doesn't seem very pertinent to me. In their article on Turcotti in The New Grove Dictionary of Opera, Dennis Libby and Carlo Vitali state that “she seems to have been primarily a dramatic singer in a mostly syllabic style (range approximately b♭ to g’’), without much brilliance or bravura”, although she was also able to master elaborate coloratura (as well as all major singers in the Eighteenth Century).
In fact, I often found her name associated with Vittoria Tesi, another great singer-actress of the first part of the century, also coming from Florence and not primarily excelling in coloratura as well. The first time I heard her name was at a 1985 wonderful revival of Pergolesi’s Adriano in Siria, where she had created the prima donna role of Emirena. This role is certainly not an acrobatic and flamboyant one and the two most skilled coloratura singers in the cast, Mariella Devia and Daniela Dessì, took on two other roles that are much more demanding in terms of coloratura, Farnaspe and Sabina.
I leave it to your appreciation whether or not to edit the article.--Jeanambr (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I can't help but get the unsourced impression that the singer depicted in the first drawing might not be Maria Giustina Turcotti.

@Jeanambr Yes I am familiar with the Libby quote which I think was a potentially ill conceived assessment because it was based on an incomplete picture of Turcotti's career. At the time Libby wrote that article only a small amount of her repertoire was is evidence. The trouble with the scholarship as written at present on Turcotti is nobody has really looked at all her repertoire in its entirety, and honestly only recently have scholars writing on Venetian opera actually located and catalogued a significant number of operas that she performed in (as in the last two to fifteen years); hence why my article was able to include many more opera roles than in the Grove publications (Libby's article is 31 years old now and is significantly outdated in relation to the recent published scholarship). Selfridge-Field (2007) and Over and Nieden (2021) have provided a much larger picture of her repertoire in Italy than was previously known (but without any analysis in terms of Turcotti's vocal range/abilities), and for this reason, I am hesitant to trust any scholarly assessment that hasn't taken a look at the many previously unknown opera roles in Turcotti's performance repertoire which are now in evidence. This would require looking at recently found opera scores that have been largely neglected in academic writing as well as performance. I also note, that based on reviews and letters in Over and Nieden, I question the previously held argument that Turcotti was having a vocal decline which ended her career in Italy (which Libby argues based on what evidence?). Reviews of her later years in Italy seemed to remain positive of her singing, and largely were negative about her appearance and stage deportment due to her weight gain. I sincerely doubt that Mingotti and the wealthy Bayreuth Court, who could have their pick of top notch talent, would have kept her on if she wasn't in fine vocal form; particularly as her voice seems to have been her only major asset as an entertainer. Additionally, no researcher has looked at her rep in Germany, and a researcher could probably dig up her opera roles in her late career. In short, this is an area where a music historian/musicologist could do some new valuable work, and potentially have something new to say on Turcotti's singing and her unusually long career. Best.4meter4 (talk) 05:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May songs

my story today

Chiming in: I admire what you did to get her recognized as a performer! - Born OTD: another stage artist, Cathinka Buchwieser, at a time when actress and opera performer wasn't distinguished, and both dubious in society. If I was a researcher I'd look into Turcotti's German repertoire. If you find something and just want help with translation or language clarification, call me! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New topic: sadly Javier Álvarez (composer) died, whose article you began. Can you help with referencing? I'll do some, but Spanish isn't a language I speak (besides menu reading in restaurants). Perhaps SusunW can help (again), even if this is a man. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hip deep with real life right now, but still trying to get in a bit of editing. If you can't find another Spanish speaker, I'm glad to help Gerda Arendt, but won't guarantee that I can respond immediately, or quickly. SusunW (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4 I completely agree with you about the shortcomings and gaps in the historical research on the figure of Turcotti, and I fully share Gerda's appreciation of your article, which I have even half a mind to translate, sooner or later, into Italian. However, I cannot identify which historiographical acquisitions after Croll and Vitali allow Turcotti to be styled a “singer of coloratura” (instead of a dramatic one), considering that their Grove article already stated: “evidence from arias written by G.B. Pescetti and Francesco Corselli, however, shows that she could master elaborate coloratura, rhythmically complex divisions and wide pitch leaps”. Cheers. Jeanambr (talk) 08:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aoidh (talk) 12:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure if this subject or the shows they were involved in would interest you, but I thiught I'd run it by you in any case. Thanks for all your great work. Take care. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does Category:Deal, New Jersey in fiction show enough potential for growth to merit a category of its own? Alansohn (talk) 02:47, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has some potential for growth. The Sopranos had some episodes set partly in Deal, New Jersey for example. There may be other content in film and literature. Ultimately cats fitting into larger category trees are useful in my opinion. Not every category needs to be large.4meter4 (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See this. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers what am I looking for?4meter4 (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"de Walden" rather than DeWalden or De Walden". -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:53, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 4meter4, a bit more info on my talk page added by another WP editor. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Novels set in deserts has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Sandstein 05:52, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in a similar (though admittedly not identical) category deletion discussion to the Cat:Novels_set_in_deserts one going on about Category:Novels set in fictional villages. I realize you may not share my opinion, but I thought I'd loop you in just the same. — the Man in Question (in question) 21:14, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 4meter4, When notify a WikiProject about a category for discussion, you may want to use the neutral template located right here. That can help avoid even the appearance of Wikipedia:Canvassing. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:57, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RevelationDirect Thank you for making me aware of the template. That said, the notices I placed were neutrally worded with a clear indication that all opinions were welcome, and without advocating for one side or the other in the notice. They were fine per WP:APPNOTE. Best.4meter4 (talk) 05:47, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly initially read the part about this setting a precedent as a call to arms but I've reread after looking at the conversations at User talk:Qwerfjkl. As a practical matter, your iVote likely moves it to "no consensus" by itself becaue participation at CFD is so low. (I think that's caused by the categories not showing in the mobile view, which is what most readers use now.) I'll remove the Template:Notavote that I added.

Also, thrilled to see you and another editor participated on some of the other nominations. Maybe CFD needs a call to arms! - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:50, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RevelationDirect Yes I think category deletion participation is so low because most editors do not have categories on their watch list. I'm almost always made aware of pertinent category deletion discussions when I see the bot removing a recently deleted category; at which point it's too late to participate and I am often genuinely perturbed but feel powerless to do anything about it. Case in point would be the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 28#Category:Governor General's Performing Arts Award winners; which I would also like re-opened. This is a common experience on wikipedia. I think the notification process needs a complete overhaul. Namely, if a cat is up for a move or deletion; notices should be placed not only on the category page but every single article contained in that category. Bots delete and remove categories for us; so they could also be designed to place notices when a cat is up for deletion. That would get the attention of editors writing in the content area and would inevitably create a better pool of commenting editors with experience in a relevant content area. In general, I find category deletion discussions often have bad outcomes because the editors involved don't know the subject matter well enough to make the right choice.4meter4 (talk) 14:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I really like that idea about the notices, at least as an option you could to turn on! - RevelationDirect (talk) 14:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jochen Breiholz has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 4meter4,

I was looking at one AFD to close and looked at a previous AFD that was on the same article that you had proposed two years ago. And I realized that I use to see you participate in AFDs much more than I do now. Did you get burned out? Or did your editing interests just take you elsewhere on the project? I valued your contributions and we have a shortage of regular thoughtful participants in deletion discussions (I mean, we have some but we could use many, many more) and just thought I'd check in with you.

Hope all is well with you and you had a good summer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC) @Liz[reply]

Thank you for the kind message Liz. I had a wonderful summer, and I hope you had a great one as well. I've always appreciated how hard you work at AFD. Thank you for your service to the encyclopedia. As for me, AFD, and my time of wikipedia...

Of late I have been happily creating new content. AFD can be a stressful place to contribute, and I decided to work elsewhere after several contentious AFDs were closed with a consensus that was not policy based. In general, policies at AFD are inconsistently implemented by closing admins; in particular the need to demonstrate WP:SIGCOV. Far too often AFDs are closed by majority vote rather than by notability policy; and in general "no consensus" is too liberally applied by admins who don't want to to have to deal with blowback from implementing notability policy as written. It doesn't help that DRV decisions are often derived by vote count as opposed to the strength of policy arguments, so in general admins aren't willing to implement community policies if the majority vote in a given AFD isn't there to support it. As a result, WP:MUSTBESOURCES arguments more often than not win; even though we know this isn't a valid or winning argument. I am not ok with that, and find it aggravating when GNG is ignored. I've also seen several AFDs close where the subject was not addressed directly and in detail in any one source, and the article was essentially built through an original synthesis of materials that were tangential to the subject. While overall I think AFD gets its right more often than wrong, I stepped away from AFD for my own inner peace. Best. 4meter4 (talk) 03:11, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:New-York Tribune personnel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 22:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you stop hurling your insults. I have no intention of going to ANI over your refusal to retract your PAs - I remembered you from seeing you around the project and thought of you as a level headed editor. I see I was wrong and I will avoid you on the project. Please stop shitting on the nomination template with your wrong-headed attacks. Lightburst (talk) 04:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you feel that you are being personally attacked, that is not my intention. I am unable to strike my comments because they are pertinent to the DYK review process in reviewing your request for censorship. I hope that we can work together congenially in the future even though we may have a difference of opinion in this particular matter. In general, I appreciate the contributions you have made to the encyclopedia and at DYK outside of this incident. Have a great day.4meter4 (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October songs

my story today

Thank you for your voice of reason in the deletion discussion for the Israeli peace song. - Today, my (daily) story is a place that inspired me, musings if you have time. My corner for memory and music has today a juxtaposition of what our local church choirs offer. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt Happy to be of assistance. Thank you for creating an interesting article on a song I was not familiar with. I enjoyed listening to recordings and researching the song while commenting at the AFD.4meter4 (talk) 12:43, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I met it at a wedding in Germany, with the father of the bride and some guests from Israel. Peace! It's in prep for a DYK on 2 Nov. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Towards the end of the month, I thought of Brian Bouldton, and his ways to compromise, - with musings about peace there, - feel free to join. Hevenu shalom aleichem. Today is Reformation Day, and I believe that reformation is a work in progress. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for expanding and referencing the article on the Jewish/Israeli folk song Hevenu shalom aleichem! gidonb (talk) 14:15, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 2 November 2023 (UTC) [reply]

November songs

my story today · music

Thank you for what you put into the peace song, making it survive, - my story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added some images from Aachen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for another theatre! - I proudly remember having sung in an oratorio premiere seven years ago OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today I have three items on the Main page today, almost too much of a good thing! Bach's amazing cantata with the unusual scale, first performed 300 years ago OTD, the nun for the prostitutes, and Schumann's wedding gift for Clara. Working on Ryland Davies, - perhaps you can add? I'll get over more detail from the GLS tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Davies looks much better. Today is St. Martin's Day, which stands for sharing. Thank you for sharing music! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk:Gerda Arendt#Mozart Requiem --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply] theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to echo what others are saying about how great your hook is, and how it instantly drew me to the article. Fantastic work. Viriditas (talk) 18:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Viriditas for the kind words.4meter4 (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ballets by topic has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Academic journals established in 1851 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Musicals set on fictional moons has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:Outer space in fiction has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you still want to try to workshop a summary? Earlier I was thinking we'd messed up the procedure which might just result in receiving only gripes for the mess up or even a premature closure as malformed/misplaced, but it looks like that is not the case. If you are still interested I should have some uninterrupted time in 6 hours or so, actually I can pop in and out now, I would just prefer to work with less interruptions. If not that is ok too, since it does look like the perfect adherence to protocol was less important here then I had anticipated. TBH, I have never fully understood the interplay between procedural policies/practices and the not bureaucracy conceptual ideation. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:1898:F371:A61F:7119 (talk) 17:33, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that a summary is really worth it as there has really only been a conversation between you, I, and one admin. If we had more participants, it might be worth documenting some sort of consensus but with so few people involved it really doesn't seem like a useful exercise. I think its pretty clear from the response at ANI that you are following what is considered normal process, but I also think that process is counter-intuitive when reading the policy page at WP:Edit Wars. I do think this thing highlights a need to re-examine the language at WP:Edit Wars and add some clarifying statements on proper process one way or the other (depending on what the community decides). I personally would like to see a more tightened policy which requires an attempt at dialogue on the talk page of the disputed arcticle prior to the issue of a warning. We should at least make an attempt at engaging in a cordial way through the WP:TALKDONTREVERT and WP:DISCUSSCONSENSUS process prior to moving to a warning banner as a means of WP:AGF and giving someone a chance to do the right thing in community space. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is that you workshop an amendment to policy at WP:VPI, and then start an RFC at WP:VPP. At least if you want to follow procedure to the t. But as recent experience shows sometimes close adherence to procedure turns out to be unnecessary, so I guess you could always just try to launch on RFC on the policy talk page, and see what happens. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:1898:F371:A61F:7119 (talk) 18:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I am not sure I want to take on a policy discussion of that magnitude. That takes a certain amount of time and engagement in non-article space which is not really how I want to spend my time. I much prefer to be working on content creation and/or article improvement.4meter4 (talk) 18:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works set on the moon has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:38, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		With thanks for your civility, good faith and willingness to do your own research at Talk:Tale of the Moon Cuckoo; I believe we've reached a solution agreeable to all. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Children's books set in airports has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:Convents in fiction has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December songs

story · music

Thank you for the article! - Today, I managed to updated my images to Paris (trip begun on 29 Nov) with a visit to the Palais Garnier, - to match the story of Medea Amiranashvili, - don't miss listening to her expressive voice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My story today is about Michael Robinson, - it's an honour to have known him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Today, I have a special story to tell, of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Orean Smith's father was the musical director of a theatre orchestra.

You wrote this in Lee Orean Smith. Just curious on where the source about this is. I'm sort of researching about composers like him. Komitsuki (talk) 04:35, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See the cited source. The entire paragraph is cited to Rehrig, William H.; Bierley, Paul E. (1991). "Lee Orean Smith". The Heritage Encyclopedia of Band Music: Composers and Their Music, Volume II. Integrity Press. ISBN 9780918048080. I had a physical copy of the book but you can access the book online in its updated version (other authors have since expanded the encyclopedia in its online form) through subscription at https://www.acbands.org/hebm There is also a blog which talks about his father making a living as a pharmacist while leading a local orchestra https://blog.wabash.edu/dearoldwabash/2019/09/30/tin-pan-alley-alum/ (I left this out as it is a blog) Rehrig and Bierley describe the orchestra as a theatre orchestra. If I remember rightly there is also an interview in Metronome magazine from September 1922 in which Smith relates details about training as a musician under his father and playing in theatre orchestras. I also left this out because it was not an independent source. Best.4meter4 (talk) 06:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Komitsuki (talk) 04:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of William Carter (composer) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Due to a lack of response, this is being marked for closure. If you wish to continue the nomination, please respond immediately. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by NPP Coordination using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Orphanages in fiction has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:47, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:Casinos in fiction has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 18 § Category:Plays set in zoos on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:Watermills in fiction has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 18 § X in fiction III on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 21 § Works by setting on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:Unidentified flying objects in fiction has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 22 § X in fiction XIII on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas, 4meter4! Wishing you Season's Greetings and a Happy Winter Solstice! As the year comes to a close, I want to express my appreciation for your dedicated efforts on Wikipedia and extend heartfelt thanks for your assistance throughout the years. May the holiday season bring you and your loved ones abundant joy, good health, and prosperity.

RV (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply] Category:Novellas set in schools has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Gjs238 (talk) 12:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello 4meter4: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]