User talk:Bobnotts: Difference between revisions

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 121: Line 121:
David<br>
David<br>
[[User:Dwsolo|dwsolo]] 14:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
[[User:Dwsolo|dwsolo]] 14:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
:I've replied by email. --[[User:Bobnotts|Bobnotts]] <small>[[User talk:Bobnotts|'''talk''']]</small> 15:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:27, 22 November 2009


Archives


Some doubts

Hi! I just applied to volunteer by adopting J.S.Bach's page...you replied...but I don't know if I can start right now or if I need to wait for some special authorization or something...

Another question... How can I respond to a score request? I visited the list of requests but I don't find a way to take that request...How does it work? Thanks! Saniakob 07:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I happened to see your question about adopting JS Bach, so I replied there that I'd add you, and you can start right away. I also updated the actual page about adopting composers (since it wasn't clear) to encourage people to claim a composer by editing the adoption list to add their own name and feel free to start working on the composer even without admin action. Hope Rob doesn't mind if I chime in here.
As for marking requests completed, the way to do that is to edit the individual request entry where it says Requested in curly brackets to change it to Completed, and to add at the bottom a link to the location of the new score. The Requests page has a link at the top that allows you to see the Completed requests versus the ones that are still in Requested status, so you can check the format of a sample completed score to see how the link to the uploaded score is formatted. Hope this helps--feel free to post if you have further questions. Similarly, you can change the status to Pending if you want to indicate that you are taking that request and working on it. --Vaarky 15:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for replying, Vaarky, but please don't use Template:ItemPost or Template:Reply on this page. Thanks! --Bobnotts talk 14:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Rossi: Rorate caeli

Hi Rob, I´ve put the latin words to that work, which originally is for instruments. But even in my biggest dictionary I can't find the correct english word for the german 'Textunterlegung'. I've found the verb: to put or set words to a tune. And the substantive? Would you please help me? Thanks and regards, --Christophero Manco 23:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The translation you want is "text underlay" (two words). You will find this term used several times at ChoralWiki. -- Chucktalk Giffen 14:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer! --Christophero Manco 23:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

out of curisority, why do you prefer no ItemPost and Reply?

Just noticed the text at the top of your talk page. Out of curiosity, can you say more about why you prefer people to avoid these templates? Is it aesthetic reasons, or are there other aspects such as page size etc.? Tx. -- Vaarky 16:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

It's purely aesthetic :-) For me, using the template is more complicated for new users (and some more seasoned ones) than simply typing their message and signing it in the manner explained above the edit window when editing a talk page. So if it's not used universally, it becomes mildly annoying when reading a discussion which includes a variety of indentations and formatting. I don't believe I'm being draconian in making this request on my talk page alone but perhaps you disagree? --Bobnotts talk 19:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I completely understand. Just was curious if there were additional considerations besides the aesthetic ones, such as trying to reduce system cycles or filesize. Tx for the further info. --Vaarky 00:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

About "Sé de una hermosa rosa"

Thanks for your answer in the song's discussion! Ok, composer is "Traditional". Should I put the link by hand in the "composer's" page? Do you mean this? In other wiki about music which I participate, songs are listed automatically in the corresponding category. About the other question, on the original text, I will answer at Carlos' talk page. --Mpancorbo 21:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct, you need to add the composer entry on the composer page manually. In this case, because "Sé de una hermosa rosa" is a translation of another work already available on CPDL, I've merged the entry into Jag vet en dejlig rosa (Traditional). Regards --Bobnotts talk 18:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday to you, Rob! At least that is what the forums report today. Have a good weekend, too. -- Chucktalk Giffen 14:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Wishing you good things for the coming year, and beyond... -- Vaarky 02:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks guys! I was able to celebrate my birthday in the midst of preparations for a performance of Handel's Messiah in the Royal Albert Hall, London, as part of the BBC Proms series, available to "listen again" on the BBC website, if you feel so inclined. --Bobnotts talk 17:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations Rob, it's a very nice recording. I managed to download it to my computer to listen offline. In case you don't have it yet I can send the whole file to you; just drop me a line. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 21:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:Translation

Hello Bob, it seems that your cat=no extension of the translations template doesn’t work. I noticed that you’ve applied it to Brahms’ Wiegenlied site a few days ago, but it’s still categorized in Category:Italian translations. —Robert Urmann 19:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Bob, that’s getting strange: I used various browsers to see if it could be up to Firefox’s cache that the translations page doesn’t fully reload. At first it seemed to work—but then I logged in and … Brahms’ Wiegenlied was back!!! I logged out, reloaded and—the site was gone. The Italian translations page lists 92 pages when logged in, and 81 when logged out! Any idea??? —Robert Urmann 17:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Brahms: Der Mann WoO 31,5

Hi Bob, I've tried to correct the links and templates, but I failed. Now, I better do not change anything. Sorry. Regards from --Christophero Manco 08:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I’ve already done it. Many thanks for all the scores, Christoph! You can compare the edits and see what happened. —Robert Urmann 08:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Re Purcell in B flat - no, I am not planning any more of this service. dst 17:48, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Scanned editions

Hi Rob, don't you think that a person who digitizes a PD score and creates a PDF from it deserves to be called an "editor"? I can't see why Yu Chao should be labeled just a "Contributor" in ‎‎, please explain me your reasoning. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 17:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Carlos. No, I don't think that a person who digitises a PD score and creates a PDF from it deserves to be called an "editor". What have they edited? Nothing, as far as I can see. This has been the standard adopted on CPDL for some time, on this page and many others. --Bobnotts talk 20:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I wasn't aware of this unwritten standard :) Then I suspect that all 20 editions by user:Jim Taylor will have to be changed accordingly, as well as a few others that I could spot: [1], [2], [3], [4]. Thanks for the info, —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 02:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Ah yes, one of the many unwritten rules! Yes, those editions should be labelled in the same way. --Bobnotts talk 22:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
What about the 'music facsimile' category and the GIF template? Should we delete all these scores? The problem is that the PDF standard hides two kinds of scores: the vectorized one which includes notes, pitch, duration, tempo, etc (the really useful score for choirs) and the image one, without any reusable edition content. We, on CPDL, have about 10,000 vectorized score and about 100 scanned scores. As we are not a site for score's pictures collectors, we have to avoid the deception of users looking for reusable content. Can we imagine a warning on the Welcome page leading to IMSLP for scanned PD scores? We should keep scanned scores only if we have the vectorized one yet. Claude 07:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
The Music facsimiles category includes much more than works contributed to ChoralWiki which are scanned editions. It also includes (usually links to) digitized images of original music sources. These latter form an invaluable tool for scholars and CPDL users, for example, by comparison of CPDL editions with original sources (especially since editorial decisions must frequently be made in preparing modern editions), and by providing links to sources of (as yet) works not available at ChoralWiki. I would be loathe to remove the Music facsimiles category. Perhaps we should consider isolating the "contribution" of scanned images of scores in a separate (sub?)category, at least for the time being, and then having a full-blown discussion as to whether we should actually list/host such scans as CPDL "editions" ... This is an issue that has bothered me for quite some time. I'm contemplating a new template (or two, depending upon whether to use parameters) just for Facsimiles (PDFs actually hosted at ChoralWiki) and Facsimile Links (for links to facsimiles hosted elsewhere)/ A valid question would be whether continue to grace the former (scanned images "published" at ChoralWiki) with a CPDL edition number. I think the "Contributor" alternate listing for the Editor template was originally intended for listing the name of the person providing a score for which they added no editorial content (such as transcribing and "diplomatic" editions). Looking back over my reply, I wonder if perhaps this discussion should be continued in a better arena than Rob's talk page - maybe the forums? -- Chucktalk Giffen 13:44, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Away in a manger

Hi Rob, yes, it's OK, of course! You're right: I'm not the composer of that tune. And thanks for letting me know the mistake on the homepage and in the score. I'll correct it soon. Regards from Christophero Manco 13:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

That leads to a question: Where shall I put my harmonization of O DU FRÖHLICHE (SATB)? - Not everybody will expect it at O SANCTISSIMA (original tune). Thanks and regards Christophero Manco 13:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
No problem. When the text is different, the harmonisation should be on a different page with a link to the original tune. --Bobnotts talk 13:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

mirror servers and probolems with servers

Hi Bob I have asked Mr Ormes and also Chuck Giffen but received no reply. Perhaps you can advise? I have been wanting to change an external link on the Lamento D'Arianna page since the beginning of last week, but I always get an unavailable response and a redirect to the mirror site. Do you know what the situation is? Will changes on the mirror site be incorporated into the main site once it is up? Can you please let me know? Maybe you can email me on dwsolo at gmail.com? For interest the links to my performance (video) of Monteverdi's Lamento are:
part one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh6Zxgq7iMg
part two:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKPwLPr5RJg

(the old link being no longer valid)
Kind regards
David
dwsolo 14:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I've replied by email. --Bobnotts talk 15:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)