User talk:JackofOz/Archive 9

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 5

←

Archive 7

→

Follow up

Hello. I received your comments on my Talk Page -- thanks. I will be away from the computer all day today (until very late tonight) ... and I will reply to your comments more fully then. In short -- however -- please give me 1 or 2 days to "clean up" that Posthumous Academy Award article that I started ... and then I will turn it over to you ... if you don't mind. It really is a mess and there are quite a few things I need to clean up before feeling comfortable having it posted. But I agree with you -- the Heath Ledger factor will make that a timely article to post very soon. So, as I said, if you can allow me a day or 2 to clean it, I will then let you have it to do as you wish. Many thanks for your understanding and patience. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC))

Hello! Thanks for your patience. I finally posted the article here ---> List of posthumous Academy Award winners and nominees. Please take a look and let me know what you think. I would really appreciate your thoughts, comments, feedback, etc. Also, of course, feel free to add, update, and edit the article. I am anxious to hear your thoughts and opinions. Many thanks! Please let me know your thoughts on my Talk Page. Again, sorry that I took so long and, again, thanks for your patience! Best, (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2008 (UTC))

Thanks, Joseph. It looks great. I'll have a close inspection over the next few days but for now it seems to fill a much-needed gap. Excellent work. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The Guv'nor

Yeah, you're right. Sorry, I was working on a cite that she was sworn in at 1pm - in fact the ceremony began at 1pm with a parade and so on. Sorry, I didn't see the tense that it hadn't quite taken place as the headline was in the past tense. Hopefully Wensley won't get hit by a bus! --Canley (talk) 03:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Mary books

Back, with three books. Will give you the full review when I have time, and not feeling quite so woozy headed. Gwinva (talk) 09:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, metamorphosed into a sloth. Or perhaps it's a fit of depression, brought on by the sad realisation that WP can and does manage to exist without me. Anyway, will write a report! Gwinva (talk) 02:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Farewell Robert A

Thanks! MartinSFSA (talk) 00:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I wish I could say Auntie Jack was a relative of mine, but I can't. :) JackofOz (talk) 00:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Milton Katims

I know it's been a long time but do you have any idea what your references were for this? Could you add some indication to the article? It looks correct but is totally unreferenced. - Jmabel | Talk 18:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Olympics

Rubbing it in? Gwinva (talk) 00:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

He he. That must be your genetically-ingrained inferiority complex showing through. I actually meant it as a compliment, because a country that can go from nothing for 7 days to its greatest single day ever is obviously doing something right when it really matters. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 01:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can take full credit of course... (all that shouting at the TV: it had a particularly satisfying effect during the team pursuit last night). As for the inferiority, well, we've just become accustomed to Aussie taunts (last few sentences). Gwinva (talk) 02:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Prompted by the Reference Desk?

Improving my family tree, I see ;) Grutness...wha? 08:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, Grutness. I've always liked his work - The Devil's Playground was particularly excellent, if you don't know it. His film career has been a bit patchy for some years, but I see from IMdB he'll be in Australia. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Use of whom and who (Chifley page)

Hi, I corrected the grammar and you changed it back. Correct usage is "in homage to his predecessor and adversary, who (for all the previous decade's political quarrels) he had never ceased to respect as a person".

we say of whom, to whom, for whom.. i.e. when who is with a preposition. In this case there is no preposition : "who he had never ceased to respect" because who is the subject of the subordinate clause. This would be correct : "the friendship of whom he had always valued" : i.e. with a preposuition. See Whom regards. Rod Rcbutcher (talk) 14:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I must respectfully disagree. The fact that there's no preposition is irrelevant, a red herring. It is indeed a subordinate clause, but the subject of that clause is "he". The verb is "had [never] ceased to respect" and the object is "whom". Menzies had never ceased to respect Chifley. Thus, it's "he" and not "him" because this represents Menzies, the subject, the doer of the action, who's nominative. The recipient of the action is Chifley. Being the object, Chifley, or words that represent him, are in objective case. "Who/whom" represents Chifley. The objective case of "who" is "whom". Thus it has to be "whom". -- JackofOz (talk) 14:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Nationality/ethnicity

Greetings, Jack! Thought you might like to read what I just added here. I hope all subsequent readers will understand my sort-of explanation and not get all fussy about What-is-a-nation/ethnicity. As you can imagine, this comes up a lot in the multicultural societies where I used to and now live, sometimes with malign rather than benign associations. For what it's worth. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 13:03, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hughie Edwards

Hi mate, I have been recently working on the article Hughie Edwards and there is a section in the text regarding some controversy surrounding his knighthood. Looking back in the history, I have seen that you added the paragraph on 12 March 2004. I have not been able to find a reference to support this section, and was hoping you would be able to supply me with one? I have been advised to have the article nominated for A-class, and was worried that with the section being unreferenced that it might be challenged. If you could supply me with a reference I would appreciate it immensely, but if not I'll work something out. Thanks mate, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I clearly remember this happening, and it made the news because it was considered very inappropriate for a governor (let alone their spouse) to be effectively asking for a knighthood; such communications, if made at all, should have been made privately, not publicly. Anyway, I've searched but can't find any reference to it online. If you want to delete my post, I'd have no objections. One day, though, it will turn up, and I will be vindicated. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 06:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the reply. Nar, I don't intend to delete the section; I believe it to be true. Thanks for having a look for a reference though, but if it does come under attack in the review (I have nominated it for GA) then I might then, but I hope not! Thanks mate, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I read this secton when posting below. Is this [1] helpful as a reference? I know nothing about the credibility of the site. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look and finding the site, but I think it's just a rip off of an old version of the article on Wikipedia. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it's a mirror all right. The style gives it away. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jack, I just thought I would give you an update. I have been able to purchase a copy of Edwards' biography and it contains a paragraph on the knighthood controversy, so I have been able to reference the paragraph! Lol, thanks mate. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoever vs whomever

Ignoramus et ignorabimus: cases of verbs and, I suppose, tenses of nouns? I thought about a further comment to bolster yours, but sometimes, with some editors, the best one can do is sigh, and move on. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Verily, Bielle. Well, I'm going to take this opportunity for a rant before I sigh and move on. The discussion about visiting cards and misspelled correspondence caused me to reflect that communication is not just about the words and sentences the writer uses, and the meaning they want to convey. When they misspell words and use inappropriate punctuation and grammar, they're also communicating a separate message - they don't care. Well, that's the impression the reader gets, and first impressions are SO important. The trouble is, we can't sheet the blame home to the writers in every case, because these days they're simply not taught about many of the things that people of our generation took for granted. Or if it comes up in class, it's glossed over as if it's only really relevant to professional writers, and the great mass of people who use the language don't need to worry too much about it. It's as if spelling words correctly is some sort of arcane discipline that we shouldn't allow ourselves the luxury of indulging in, because life is too short. I mean, come on. Teachers have a responsibility to tell their charges that all writers, in all circumstances, should consider themselves professionals, and actually give a damn, whether they're being paid for it or not. Getting by with the bare minimum is a hopeless standard, and the results of these educational policies speak for themselves. The teachers themselves are typically young folk in their 20s, and they themselves were not taught what they should have been taught, and so on, all the way back to whenever society started to go so badly wrong. The other problem is that many readers of badly written correspondence are completely unaware it's badly written, because they come from the same educational cohort as the writers. They wouldn't know a run on sentence or a misplaced modifier if it hit them over the head. So, what we often have nowadays is the ignorant communicating with the ignorant. Thank God for you and me. There, I've said it. I know I'm preaching to the converted, but maybe someone else will read this and do something positive. Now, I'll sigh and move on. Thanks for your forbearance. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I feel ignorant myself when I read the likes of Angr. I didn't know that grammar could change so much in one lifetime. Whatever names the experts use, however, it is clear that some of us care to write as clearly as possible, and most of us don't - either "care" or "write as clearly as possible" now that I re-read that sentence. One of the factors is age; one of the others is luck. I had an amazing teacher when I was 11 and 12 who loved grammar and taught all of us to love it, too. If you were a student in either of the other two classes for this age level, you just didn't get the same teaching, and that was within a single elementary school. I make more mistakes now that I did 40 years ago, but 40 years ago I was en editor in a textbook publishing house, and was dealing with matters of grammar and style on a hourly basis. (And I still remember the applicant for an editorial job who was outraged enough to write to the president of the company when I wouldn't interview him because of the number of language errors in his initial letter. The rot had set in even then.) We do what we can, and are grateful that the choir listens. ៛ Bielle (talk) 02:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Nicely put, Bielle. Languages are dynamic, though, and shift -- sometimes subtly, sometimes radically. Both the brake of prescriptivism and the accelerator of descriptivism can be over-used. Case-endings in English are fading like eth and thorn did. They may linger for centuries more than necessary (see British monarchy, but all the fulminating that George Will can muster won't matter. The who/whom confusion is becoming too abstruse for some; I think the "everyone should open their book" battle has been won by the more pragmatic side. In other issues, I have strong opinions and hew to the notion that in the long run, we're all dead. — OtherDave (talk) 10:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

S.57

Thanks, never knew it took 3! Learn something new every day. Timeshift (talk) 09:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxfordian, but otherwise a likeable person

Jack: just skimmed your user page. You've probably seen the articles referenced here, but if not -- years ago The Atlantic Monthly ran four articles on the Shakespeare/Oxford debate. I liked them so much I've saved the print copies. As a mathematical bonus, I think you'll enjoy The Ghost's Vocabulary. — OtherDave (talk) 10:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Outgoing

"calling both of them "outgoing" is not right - Milliner died"

I suppose he was outgoing in a other-worldly sense... Orderinchaos 13:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Riley Lee

Thanks for the heads up, Jack, and congratulations on a first-rate article. Now I'm even happier than before that I've been at the 2008 Shakuhachi Festival (and seen Lee in the flesh !). Regards, MUSIKVEREIN (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well, all I can say is that it's nice to be invited; however, how anyone quite got the idea that I'm a UK Wikipedian is one of life's little mysteries. I live in Australia, on the other side of the world. There's a reason my user name is JackofOz. I'm not planning to be in London any time soon. Thanks anyway. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Fact check

"Lyons becoming the first Australian to lead a party to three consecutive federal election wins" - Hughes/Nationalists? 1917, 1919, 1922? Timeshift (talk) 01:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Good Lord, how uncharacteristically silly of me. I did have a cite for this, but it just shows you can't believe everything you read. Thanks. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps technically the cite is correct? As Hughes government started as Nationalist and ended as Nationalist/Country coalition. Timeshift (talk) 02:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I’d never really focussed much on that era, but I see that the Nationalists lost their majority in 1922 and had to form a coalition with the Country Party in order to stay in government, the price of which was Hughes’s resignation as leader and PM. It’s the only time in our history a coalition was formed after an election in order to maintain a parliamentary majority previously held by a single party. Hughes’s deputy Stanley Bruce became the PM; so while it could be said that Hughes’s party “won” the election, Hughes himself was a loser. Another interpretation is that Hughes did in fact remain PM after the election (albeit only for a short period; he may as well have lost the election from this point of view because all defeated incumbent PMs stay in office for a short period until the new PM is sworn in). Which ever way you look at it, it was very much a qualified win as far as Hughes was concerned.
The first time an existing coalition under the same leader of the dominant party won 3 elections on the trot was 1937 (Lyons/Page). Menzies/Fadden (1949, 1951, 1954), Fraser/Anthony (1975, 1977, 1980) and Howard (1996, 1998, 2001; with Fisher for the first 2, Anderson for 2001) all repeated this effort.
The first time a single party under the same leader won 3 elections on the trot was not till 1987 (Hawke – Labor).
I also see that Howard is our only PM who ticked all the boxes: lost an election from Opposition (1987), won an election from Opposition (1996), won elections in government (1998, 2001, 2004), and lost an election as incumbent PM (2007). Fascinating when you start to analyse some of these things. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Addinsell / Douglas

I think you should re-evaluate some of Roy's input into Addinsell's scores.

"From December 1935 to January 1943 I orchestrated every bar of all Richard Addinsell's music for films and broadcasts. I must state firmly that I did not compose any of it. We developed a method wherby he would play his music on the piano (he could stretch a twelfth with either hand), and I would rapidly take it down to paper as he played. His contribution to the orchestrations was to say 'this is strings only, that is oboe, give that to the horns' and so forth, and I would eventually take my draft away and complete scoring in all details..."

Roy Douglas, ICRC Autumn Edition 1999

Beckus (talk) 18:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Beckus. Thanks for that very interesting bit of information.

I've taken the opportunity to re-evaluate the current wording and I don't believe it's inconsistent with what we're saying about Douglas's contribution. Nowhere do we state that he composed any of the music in the sense of coming up with tunes independently of Addinsell. He orchestrated Addinsell's ideas, with guidance from him about which instruments played what. But my reading of your quote is that Addinsell did not specify the complete instrumentation down to the last triangle - it was broad brush strokes and main instruments only, which Douglas had to fill out with his own knowledge of what worked best. That's what I understand by "...I would eventually take my draft away and complete scoring in all details...". -- JackofOz (talk) 20:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but remember that Dimitri Tiomkin comunicated in nearly the same way to Addinsell. How a film composer comunicates with an orchestrator differs. Some just hum (Chaplin, Lai), some give very detailed sketches (Goldsmith) and Tiomkin and Addinsell found their own methods to get the message across. Still orchestration is neither composition or arranging.

Beckus (talk) 08:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Again, very interesting info about how methods vary. We're in unison about the distinctions between composition, orchestration and arranging. So, I'm a little unsure as to what it is that you have an issue with. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC Bates method article for 2 important issues

Dear JackofOz ,If you have time and are willing to share your point of view. Can you give your comment arguments about the current discussion in the bates method article.

Paragraph :

22 RFC Nr : 1 change of title Bates method into Bates method / Natural Vision improvement

23 RFC No : 2 Removal of sourced quotes

( See also par 24 : Some objective factual information of the past and now and the discussion with Ronz on my talkpage )Seeyou (talk) 11:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I just realised...

…I know we all "know" that Rachmaninov spelled his name Rachmaninoff in the West, but do we have a ref for it? — $PЯINGεrαgђ 16:03 7 September, 2008 (UTC)

Hi Spring. I googled "Rachmaninoff spelling" and the first hit was this. It’s not a primary source, though. (And it might mean we have spell his patronymic Vassilievitch (with a t - ugh!), because there’s probably an argument that if we’re governed by his own spelling of his surname, we should also be governed by his own spelling of his patronymic. So, being a secondary source, I discount it.) However, I found this, which contains a photo of his signature – “S. Rachmaninoff” – and a small discussion of the issue, which tells us this is how his name appears in his ID papers, on his tombstone, and used by his heirs to this day. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Eventuationologicalic Aside

Ultimately it's all style, other than fifth-leg usage. (Abraham Lincoln reportedly asked, "If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?" His answer: four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one.) I'm even open to the possibility that perfectly sensible people use "eventuate," though I'm highly skeptical that it has the kind of play outside the U.S. that "whilst" has in the U.K.

This isn't to argue; I liked the remark about macassar oil. --- OtherDave (talk) 12:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Rock on

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		For being such an amazing WP:RD contributor of course! Personally I’m glad to have your perspective and assistance on the classical music questions too. Rock on --S.dedalus (talk) 01:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, that's much appreciated. Thank you, S. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Great Help

Hello Jack!

I can always count on you for a great answer :). You've given me a lot to work with in my "Classical Piano" question. What did you start out with? Do any of your recommendations lend themselves especially to a beginner? I do like Bach, and his Brandenburg Concertos were something I very much enjoyed. I also liked the other stuff too, and that's the problem. If you had to pick one piece, one CD, which would it be, and what label and conductor? I'd really like to have one to start out with, because when I think of all those composers, my head starts to spin :). Just from listening to a few clips, the Rachmaninoff seems pretty cool, but that's just with about three minutes of sample pieces. I just thought I'd mention it, but don't let that influence your response too much. It is kind of like that with the orchestral stuff as well. Basically with that, I just started buying what people said was "great" classical, and it seemed to work out well. Thanks again for the help Jack! As usual, I can count on your expertise.

Mike MAP91 (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments, Mike. I was immersed in classical music from an early age, from listening to it on radio (which I still do much/most of the time). I guess the composer I was most strongly attracted to was Chopin, and when I started learning the piano (at age 11; I was a late starter) it was his music that I focussed on as much as anyone's. It's hard to pick a single CD, or nominate any particular works out of the ones I've already mentioned. My best suggestion would be to pick a pianist who's got very good (or better) reviews, and again, selecting just one from the literally hundreds of great pianists is a really hard ask. Pianists who've been particularly renowned for their Chopin playing would include Arthur Rubinstein, Krystian Zimerman (both Poles, like Chopin), and Maurizio Pollini. There are many, many others, but you simply can't go wrong with any of these 3. Just pick any CD that mentions the words "Chopin" and any of those 3 names, and you'll be on a winner. Maybe a disc of selected works that give you an overall feel for what Chopin’s like. That's solo piano. These 3 pianists only played with sympathetic conductors, so if you want to hear Chopin’s 2 concertos, their involvement would be the guiding principle. I was also particularly attracted to Sergei Rachmaninoff, and if you want to hear arguably the most popular concertos in the entire concerto repertoire, listed to his 2nd and 3rd concertos. The 2nd was written after a period of deep depression after a failed symphony, and he only got back on the composing track with the help of a hypnotist, to whom he dedicated the concerto. Did you ever see the movie Shine? Rachmaninoff's 3rd concerto ("the Rach 3", as they called it) played a particularly strong role in the story. Great movie. Then there's his Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini, for piano and orchestra. It consists of 24 variations on a theme, and the 18th Variation has become particularly famous in its own right (as it should). As with most things, you only really discover what you like in music by listening to lots of different things and seeing which ones appeal and which ones don't. It’s different for everyone, and it therefore can only be trial and error. But make a start. Once you’ve started, there’s no going back and the vistas just keep on opening up. For example, I’ve heard of George Lloyd by reputation, but I can’t say I’ve ever heard any of his music. But now that you’ve mentioned him alongside Bach and Mendelssohn, I will seek him out and explore what he has to offer. Reading about the background to the music and the circumstances in which the composers wrote their stuff is always helpful too, and Wikipedia is excellent for that. I hope this is helpful. Cheers. PS. You mentioned William Bolcom. Try to get a hold of his "Three Ghost Rags". Wonderful. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Jack,

Thanks for the further help on the subject. I will definitely be purchasing something by either Chopin or Rachmaninoff. If I go with a Chopin first, it will be performed by one of the three pianists that you recommended. I just have to figure out what to go with first! I have never seen the movie Shine, but now that you mention it, I will definitely try to rent it. It sounds like a very interesting one. I will also listen to some more radio (as I mentioned in the help desk article, we have WQXR 96.3 FM here, which is supposedly one of the greats. Thanks again, and all the best!

Mike MAP91 (talk) 20:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Australian bios

Yes I've just been on New Page Patrol. Good to see some decent articles coming in today. I hope you don't feel offended by me adding the tags but I spotted some neutrality issues on quick scanning it. Perhaps it needs to be tone down in places to avoid WP:PEACOCK words. Many new articles are on utterly unencyclopedic topics on 16 year old sportspeople and web comics, but many of them today seem exactly what we are looking for. I;ve created Category:Australian musical instrument makers. Perhaps you could populate this category? Or are you going through the ADB? The Bald One ^{White cat} 13:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The little

"the little I know" -- LOL, Jack, you're too modest. :) Funny thing though, it was by listening to classical radio as a kid that I learned the little I know too ... Antandrus (talk) 23:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, you're too kind. I'm sure that's many people's experience, Antandrus. I'd be sad if TV were abolished (not that I watch a great deal of it), but if radio were abolished I think I'd cut my throat. I really meant what I said about what little I know. Sure, I've managed to learn all the core stuff that most aficionados are aware of, but I am constantly finding out about new composers, new works - well, not necessarily new at all, but new to me. See the above thread about George Lloyd, for example. I know his name, and a little about his life, but to my knowledge I've never heard a note of his music. About 2 years ago I acquired the score for the complete 555 Scarlatti sonatas. There's a lifetime's study in that lot alone. The vast majority of them I had never heard anywhere. Btw, can you recommend a piano recording of the complete set, if it exists. Various people have done bits and pieces. I know Scott Ross did them all on a harpsichord, but that's not my thing, I'm afraid. (And even if I did enjoy the harpsichord in more than 2-minute stretches, I probably wouldn't listen to Scott Ross anyway because he said that Glenn Gould knew nothing about Bach !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I actually don't have a recommendation on the Scarlatti -- I've only got selections. Anthony Newman on harpsichord, and ... and ... can't find it now; someone else, somewhere in this heap of CDs. Perversely I prefer them on the piano, not sure why, especially considering how the "crush chords" really don't work on one. -- Hearing Glenn Gould play (and sing) the WTC and Goldberg Variations was a formative experience for me; that music was magical; it had something I wanted, couldn't touch, knew was there but was just out of my kid reach ... still is, in fact: there's still more to be found on every hearing. That first recording of the Goldberg Variations I think is one of the Himalaya peaks in performance history. -- Speaking of current composers, what the heck is Peter Sculthorpe up to these days? I'll never forget the excitement of first hearing his music when I was in graduate school: seemed like a completely fresh and new voice. I live for those ... Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I really don't keep close tabs on most living composers. The last major new work by Sculthorpe I can recall hearing was his Requiem (2004), with a prominent part for didgeridoo. Fascinating. Not quite my scene, but fascinating. I'm always interested in what Elena Kats-Chernin brings out, though. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

date linking

Hi; you say "date linking is now deprecated". By whom? Grant | Talk 04:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I should have said. It's not my rule but that of WP:MOS. The word is gradually getting out there. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Chopin

Hello again Jack! I've looked through Amazon.com extensively for Chopin material, and I have found a great amount. I wanted to ask your opinion before I made my choice though. The main ones I've looked at are the Etudes, the Polonaises, the Preludes, and the Nocturnes. Which would give me the best introduction and overview of Chopin? I saw many played by Pollini as well as Rubenstein. I also saw a group of Nocturnes by Ivan Moravec, but you did not mention him. Just by listening quickly, Pollini's style seemed to appeal to me. It seemed warmer and more accessible for some reason. Maybe it was my imagination, or maybe it was just the clip that Amazon picked :). I really enjoyed his playing of the Preludes (Deutsche Grammophon) at first listen. Would I do well going with these? I think it would be best to purchase a CD that just contained a complete set of one type. There is an edition with the Preludes, Etudes, and Polonaises (all complete) played by Pollini, but I'm afraid it would be overwhelming. What do you think? Thanks!!!

Mike MAP91 (talk) 00:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Mike. OK, if I had to choose between the 4 types you've mentioned, I'd go with the Etudes (flashy and brilliant) and the Nocturnes (dreamy and lyrical). They could be seen as representing the daytime and the night time respectively. For an introduction to Chopin, I still think a CD with examples of different types of pieces would give you a better overall picture of him. If the Etudes or the Nocturnes as a genre don't particularly appeal to you, you'll end up with a CD you probably won't play very much; whereas if it contained a ballade, a couple of Valses, some Mazurkas, Nocturnes, and basically a mixture of things, it would be more accessible and you'd find yourself playing it often. But that's your call, of course. Two of the polonaises are particularly famous - the "Military" Polonaise (A major, Op. 40/1) and the "Drum" or "Heroic" Polonaise (A flat, Op. 53 - from memory). I'm sure you would recognise them, and I can imagine you saying "Oh, so that's what that tune is; I've heard it lots of times but never know what it was called". The Preludes are haunting, but are written in a somewhat ecletic mixture of styles. For me, they're not for everyday listening; whereas I could listen to the Etudes and the Scherzi every day and never tire of them. And don't forget the Valses and Mazurkas. Chopin himself felt the mazurka was his natural home territory, the mazurka being the national dance of his homeland Poland. He wrote only 4 ballades, 4 scherzi and only 1 example of a Barcarolle and some other things. But he wrote well over 50 mazurkas, all through his composing life. Ivan Moravec has never been on my personal list of favourite pianists, but he is very highly regarded and very popular, and I'm sure you'd have no reason to be disappointed in his playing. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Chopin/Music 2

Hello Jack,

Just one question before I purchase (I'm sorry to keep up the suspense): I've found two versions which I enjoy: the Perahia Etudes (Sony) CD and the Pollini Etudes (DG) CD. There is also the Pollini Etudes/Preludes/Polonaises CD. I might want to purchase the Story Of Chopin In Words And Music CD, which includes many different varieties of Chopin's music as well as his history. This is performed by Ingrid Haebler, and it is $2.98, so it won't be a burden to purchase another one or two CDs. There were also the Piano Favourites/2 or Best of Chopin (both Naxos) performed by Idil Biret, the Favorite Piano Works (Decca), performed by Ashkenazy, and Best of Chopin (Philips), by various performers. Maybe the Philips one will give me a more dynamic view, as different pieces are performed by different pianists. I guess any of those would give me a good overview also. If I go with the Etudes/Preludes/Polonaises CD, I will get a good (though almost exhaustive) view of many of his works, but his "greatest hits" CDs are probably more accessible. I did look at some Rubinsteins, but they all come in box sets, and most of them are with full orchestra, like you said. Maybe you could take a look at the links I gave and tell me which ones have the best selections? What do you think?

Thanks! Mike MAP91 (talk) 15:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

P.S. - I see the names Horowitz, Arrau, Ashkenazy, and Ohlsson or Pires (less frequently) floating around. I just wanted to know what you thought of them as Chopin performers, as they appear quite a lot in the listings of CDs. Also, have you read about George Lloyd yet? He's a very interesting character (What other composer do you know that grew mushrooms and carnations!?), and I really enjoyed his 5th Symphony. It was a great introduction into the classical world for me.

P.P.S. - I took your advice and listened to WQXR last night...I heard a really great piece by Mahler (his Third Symphony, as well as Handel's Symphony No. 82. I am very happy I tuned in for an hour or so. I really enjoyed both of these pieces. I also wanted to share something I found surprising as I entered the classical world. I picked up a copy of Bach's Brandenburg Concertos by I Musici (Philips) in early August. They included two of his violin concertos (A minor and E major). I enjoyed the Concertos, and I was actually going to skip the two Violin Concertos, as I never thought in a million years that I would enjoy violin music. It turns out his Violin Concerto in E major is one of my favorite pieces in classical so far. It just resonates with me. And to think I was going to skip it! I guess it just goes to show you to always keep an open mind. I don't think I'll ever think about skipping an item on a CD again. I could be missing out on a new favorite :).

Hello Jack,

After thinking about it, I decided to just take the plunge. I purchased the The Best of Chopin (Philips). I feel it will give me a good overview of Chopin, like you recommended. It will be here in 5 to 7 days, and so I'll tell you how it is when it gets here. I am looking forward to finally putting it into the CD player after much deliberation :). After I listen through the CD thoroughly, I will pick out another, more comprehensive CD of my favorite type of music, by one of the pianists whom you recommended. Thanks again for all the help, and all the best!

Mike MAP91 (talk) 02:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I was going to respond to your first message today, but then another came, and another, and another .... So I decided to hold fire till I thought you'd finally worked out what you wanted to say. :) But I'm glad to hear you've taken the plunge. I will be interested in your reaction. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that. It seemed like just when I felt I included everything, I thought of something else to put down :). I never knew how to include external links until I wrote this talk section, so at least I improved my Wiki skills. Amazon said I should get the CD Wednesday. Thanks again for all the help! I'll let you know what I think as soon as I listen.

Mike MAP91 (talk) 15:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Neal Peres Da Costa

A tag has been placed on Neal Peres Da Costa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. mboverload @ 00:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

In the same minute that I added the "hang on" tag to the article and put a paragraph on the discussion page, just to dot all the Is and cross all the Ts, Mboverload removed the Speedy tag. You had done all the work, of course; I was just trying to ensure nothing bureaucratic would get in your way. I suspect, given the timing, Mboverload didn't even see my tag. Good work, sir. All is quiet and secure now. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Bielle. If you hadn't added the hang-on tag, I would have within a short time anyway; but it's good to know my friends are looking out for me. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Shoes of the Fisherman

Let's examine the meaning of the word coup: "A quick, brilliant, and highly successful act; a triumph". Juxtaposing "literary coup" with "Pope John XXIII died" is about as tasteless as you can get. Excluding obvious and intentional vandalism, I would nominate that edit as one of the most horribly written statements in Wikipedia history. Ward3001 (talk) 04:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Double wow!! That in itself is quite a coup. Naturally, I don't share your view. But on this occasion I'm not going to fight. Instead, I'm going to frame the above and show it to all my friends and wear it as a badge of honour. I might also put it on my CV. It will certainly be placed prominently on my user page. See, there's always a silver lining. You have a nice day now. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Because I thought that that congruence of events was interesting, I reinserted the fact, leaving out your "literary coup" in the interests of earthly, if not celestial, harmony. My own publishing experience says that changing a publishing date is not an easy exercise, so I doubt it was planned, but I have no evidence for this. And that is a nice segue (Do the Australians pronouce it "seg-way" as all my musician friends do, even those who should know better?) to: do you have a source for the exact publishing date of The Shoes of the Fisherman? I have spent some time looking, but my Google-foo seems to be all fooed up, and I have not been successful. There is a reference to a speech given in the 80s by Edwin McDowell to an ABA Conference wherein this was mentioned, but I don't have access to the full text in the N.Y. Times where it was published. Ward3001 has requested a citation. ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Bielle. You're not going to believe this, but I think I've chucked it out. It came from a newspaper clipping, an article on Morris West in one of the weekend papers from about 10 years ago. I've amassed a huge number of clippings over the years, of information I could not possibly do without - but always wondering just exactly how I'd ever use them. Then Wikipedia put its hand up, and since then I've been systematically going through them and adding in bits that are appropriate to the project. Unless I'm anticipating some argy-bargy, I simply throw the clipping out. I normally add my source, but in this case it seemed like something that would have been well known, and an online cite would be a cinch to find. Perhaps if I hadn't been so lazy and tried to track down such a cite myself, I would have discovered it's not supported. If you've had trouble confirming the date, that strongly suggests to me that the exact coincidence of dates was a trifle hyperbolic. I'd happily believe the book was published in the same week (it reached #1 on 30 June, 27 days after John XXIII's death), but I'd now need a little more convincing to believe the 2 events happened on exactly the same date. McDowell may simply have been repeating the hyperbole he believed in good faith. Maybe we'd need to go to the publisher to get the facts. Drat you, Bielle - you've crushed one of my most recent new bits of favourite trivia. In the meantime, I could not be party to including information on Wikipedia that I have doubts about (even if qualified by a cite tag), because it will just turn up on thousands of trivia lists as if it were indisputably true - so I think it ought to disappear for now, until such time as my original source can be confirmed, if that ever happens.

Segue? Most people I know say "seg-way". Is there something I ought to be aware of? Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, now I have learned something. Yes, everyone I know pronounces the word "segway", too. However, they don't say "fyoog-way" or "leeg-way" for "fugue" and "league". When you live in an English-French bilingual country, your first assumption tends to be that, if a word isn't obviously English in form, then it must be French. That would mean the word ~~"should"~~ "segue" ought to be pronounced to rhyme with "leg". I have done a little research in the past half-hour or so and discovered that my assumption was wrong. The word is Italian in origin [2], though having already a perfectly good Italian synonym in music (attacca) for the concept, I don't know why they needed to confuse me with a second one! Along with crushing one of your favourite bits of trivia, I have crushed my own smug certainty. Rats! And double rats! ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

GBS would be proud of you: "should" pronounced to rhyme with "leg" - I suspect you meant "league", not "should". :)

Now, I've learned something. I always knew segue wasn't French, but I actually thought it was Spanish, not Italian. I think it's a more serviceable term than "attaca" in general contexts. "This neatly segues into that" vs. "This neatly attacas into that". I think I prefer the former. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yours was a good guess at what I meant, but . . . The bold faced text shows what I should have written. Should I be "ghoti slapped"? I have corrected The Shoes of the Fisherman and, unasked, Morris West. You were busy that day. Time for bed. ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

And I forgot all about "argue" and "value"! That's what a night's sleep will do. ៛ Bielle (talk) 15:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Update

I've managed to confirm the coincidence of the dates. It still could be anecdotal, but at least it's not just one lone voice making this claim. See Talk:The Shoes of the Fisherman#Publication date. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Excellent detective work, that! Thanks for letting me know. ៛ Bielle (talk) 23:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

8 1, 8 1

Numbers are even less my field than words: ha, ha? ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

San Marino

sorry, still can't figure out Wike editing very well: could you email me on sander777777@hotmail.com ? because I found a couple of historical articles with links that support that San Marino was not neutral in World war 2. I changed that a couple of times on wikipedia, but every time it was changed back, i think wthout good support. best regards, Sander —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.61.28.21 (talk) 19:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but I don't email people I don't know and who aren't registered users. To discuss any changes to the San Marino article, please raise any issues on the Talk page. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Louvre

Greetings Jack, I came upon your userpage by accident the other day, while aimlessly browsing. However, you seem to be for whom I'm searching. I am in need of someone with a sharp knowledge of grammar/prose to look over the Louvre article, which I have been editing, with others, for about 8 months. I've done most of the content writing, but I am an awful copy-editor (especially for sections I've written). The article is quite long, and this topic is not listed as one of your "Interests and activities". Nevertheless, I feel that you could help with rendering the prose more concise. Any thoughts? Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 18:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've had a go, but there were very few errors, really, so congratulations on a good job. I focussed mainly on disambigging some links. The bit on the Axe Historique needed a little bit of work, and may still do. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I appreciate the time spent. I've been trying to simplify the language and clarify the prose, so thank you for the kind remark. I agree, the Axe Historique was shaky. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

editprotected

As per [3], if you tell me the particulars, I'll make it happen. - Nunh-huh 04:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

James Barton

Sorry, Jack - I know there are a few James Bartons out there more famous than I am, but I don't anything about the one you mentioned. Good luck finding out more. James barton (talk) 11:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Phantom/Rob Guest

Would you kindly add the reference where you got the info about Rob Guest setting some kind of record? What kind of record is it? Is he the longest-running performer in any musical in history (if so, that's a hard claim to prove), or just the longest-running performer in any production of Phantom, or what? Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Is it this? I don't think his self-written bio for the Wicked site is a very WP:reliable source for a claim of this kind. Perhaps the info can be verified somewhere else and clarified as to what sort of record is meant. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Ssilvers. I copied the info from Rob Guest, which I know I shouldn't do. (slaps wrist). I checked the citation on that page ([4]), which is the bio you refer to, and it says: "... he was cast as The Phantom in Phantom of the Opera, going on to play the role to great acclaim for a record 2,289 performances over 7 years". It doesn't actually say whether that was a world record for the Phantom title role, or just for the Phantom productions in Australia. I'm not sure we can conclude it was written by Guest himself, but regardless of that, it's still ambiguous as to exactly what it refers to. I'll raise the issue at Guest's talk page and see if we can clarify it. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...

... for the comment on this. That means a lot to me, coming from you! I suppose one of the vices of middle age is enjoying pontificating about virtues and vices. Like you I'm a lover of books and quotables; some aphoristic writers, particularly La Rochefoucauld, almost seemed to be writing about Wikipedia: it was uncanny. The modern age has no monopoly on wisdom. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Colin Brumby

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Colin Brumby, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.amcoz.com.au/composers/composer.asp?id=193. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:54, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Colin Brumby

A tag has been placed on Colin Brumby requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Abhishek ^Talk 04:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Was the "Wreck of the Hesperus" reckless?

In the text purporting to answer a question on the Entertainment Ref Desk (one whose subject was of so little import to me that I have forgotten it the time it has taken to click from there to here, albeit on dial-up), just underneath a remark made by you, is the following: "His license was suspended for wreckless driving." My driving is, so far, also "wreckless". Given the spelling of "license", I am hoping the ~~jusidiction~~ jurisdiction which does such things is American, and it won't happen to me in Canada. Which state we should be avoiding, I wonder? ៛ Bielle (talk) 19:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

He he. I spotted that too, but thought I'd been up on my high horse enough lately, so I let it pass. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

My response is merely an aside to you. I haven't been able to get up on my high horse recently; either my knee gives way, or my typing does. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Colin Brumby

No problems. I always look at the history and when I saw who created it I was pretty sure you wern't posting copyvios. I usually read through the reference desks on a weekly basis. I guess I started to get frustrated by the number of questions that could have been answered by either looking at the article or doing a quick Google search. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 23:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Sophie Menter

Started an article on pianist Sophie Menter. Would appreciate your input. Thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 00:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Input

There is a post on WP:AN that you may or may not wish to comment on. Prince of Canada^{t | c} 07:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Neal Peres Da Costa

Hi, Jack! I wonder if you could find a source on Neal Peres Da Costa that is available on the web? I've searched Google high and low for the Good Weekend source you added, but can't find anything that corroborates. And even the theage.com.au doesn't have anything. Can you help out? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, SatyrTN. No luck here either. Good Weekend is also an insert for the Sydney Morning Herald (The Age and SMH are both owned by the Fairfax organisation). I checked the SMH site [5] and it tells us Good Weekend is not carried online. Pity, really, it's sometimes full of excellent reading - but I guess they have to give people some incentive to buy the hard copy paper. I believe they put out a consolidated GW CD every quarter. If microfiche is still used these days (I'm out of practice in doing that sort of research), I suppose it would eventually become available through library newspaper microfiche holdings. Sorry. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

~~So what's your opinion? Does the GW reference count as WP:V? I was unable to find any other sources to back up Da Costa's sexuality and/or his relationship with Yeadon.~~

Found something: Star Observer. That works fine, don't you think? :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

That certainly confirms they're a married couple, but it doesn't give any details of where and when the marriage took place. or even if there was a "marriage". I'm sure you know that "married couple" is often used in the gay/lesbian world to mean 2 boy/girl friends who have a committed relationship but nothing more "legal" than that. I have no worries with adding it in as an additional source, but the GW is the only one I know of that tells us they had a UK civil partnership in 2007. Re your struck-out post, I don't see the issue with WP:V. That doesn't say that the only acceptable refs are online ones. If all we can find is a paper source, that's better than nothing. True, it means it can't be readily checked, but that's no different from the vast number of book/journal cites we use in major articles. The only way anyone else can verify the cite is to obtain a copy of the book/journal and go to the page referred to. That's usually not too hard, an inconvenience and maybe a wait at worst, but in this case I guess overseas readers just have to trust that I really did get it from a published source. I'll keep my eye out for something online in the meantime. The non-online availability of GW is actually a damn shame, because I've collected lots of clippings from GW over the years, many of which I've been planning to use as WP citations. I'll still do so if all else fails, but I'll prefer online cites if they exist. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

And I see you've found it via the journo's name. Well done. How did you track it down? -- JackofOz (talk) 02:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

No problem. THat seems to be a favourite picture to use. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 03:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

SOH

Hi there. Could you please provide a reference for this. I'm not doubting it, but everything should be verified. Cheers --Merbabu (talk) 00:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Merbabu. Here it is. I'll add the cite to the article. Thanks for the reminder. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Soulima Stravinsky

I know this a stretch, but I noticed you created the wikipedia article on Soulima Stravinsky. Would you happen to have his piano suites for right hand? My left hand is injured right now and I would really like to learn his pieces. If you are in possession of any other right handed manuscripts please let me know.

Thanks, Nakul

ntiruviluamala@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.184.30 (talk) 04:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

(copy of my email reply)

Hi Nakul

Sorry, I’ve never seen any of Soulima’s compositions. I remember seeing his name on pieces in music shops in my early days, which I why I was aware of his existence. But I never bought any of them, and nothing I’ve ever read about him since then has persuaded me his music is of sufficient quality to search them out now. I’ve never heard a note of his music on radio in over 45 years of listening, and can’t even remember hearing his name ever mentioned. Had his father been Igor Smith rather than Igor Stravinsky, I doubt he’d even qualify as a notable person for Wikipedia purposes. The only reason I wrote his article is that he does appear in music reference works, and I like researching and writing about obscure people who just scrape through our notability guidelines. (Living at the extreme edge of things is sort of my natural territory.) But I may be doing him a grave injustice. Some enterprising conductor or pianist should put on concerts or record CDs of works by virtually unknown people like Soulima Stravinsky, just so that we can get a chance to actually hear what their music sounds like. You never know, there could be some undiscovered gems in among the trash. And someone should record and play pieces for the right hand; we hear a lot about left-hand music, but the solo right hand gets little coverage at all. (There must be a reason for that, but I'm not sure I know what it is.)

Cheers, Jack.

Hello....

Soulima Stravinsky recorded for a small American label (Allegro) during the '50s; I have one of his recordings (not of daddy's music), and it's very, very nice indeed. Later, another small label (Centaur) picked him up. I did a quick search and found that he was also longtime accompanist for another figure best remembered for a relative, but here it's the reverse situation: Roman Totenberg, father of the well-known (at least in the US) news correspondant Nina Totenberg. If time permits, perhaps I'll add that to the S. Stravinsky article.

As to why right hand literature gets short shrift, it has to do with physiology: left hand music is simply more idiomatic for the keyboard. That's because the strong fingers of the left hand (thumb and index, i.e. "1" and "2") are at the top of the left hand, situating them advantageously to bring out the melody line on top and leaving the weaker fingers for the accompaniment in the bass. With the right hand, the situation is reversed: the weak fingers get the job of trying to bring out the melody line over bass played by the strong ones. Drhoehl (talk) 00:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Newstead Abbey

Would I be right in saying you are interested the the Poet Byron? If I am then please talk to me about improving Newstead Abbey which was his home for about six years (but of course you knew that!) on my talk page. Thanks. Wikisaver62 (talk) 18:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

ANAM/Garratt

I notice you added a reference to Garrett's ministerial announcements but I can't see the one relating to this decision. Can you point it out for me? Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 01:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. Wrong cite. Fixed now. Thanks. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey Jack

There's a request to identify music running behind a footy ad that I'm sure you would manage. It's here[6] if you have the time. Best, Julia Rossi (talk) 12:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks in advance for any help you can give :) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 12:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Mag-ni-ficent. :) Julia Rossi (talk) 22:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm

'The Tossy Spivakovsky Way of Bowing by Gaylord Yost?' Get along, you're making them up...! Eebahgum (talk) 00:26, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Well, this is where I got that snippet of info from, and it's also mentioned in the Australian Dictionary of Biography source (see Bibliography - G. Yost). Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair cop. I think that's a must for my bookshelf. warmest greetings, Eebahgum (talk) 00:42, 31 October 2008 (UTC)