User talk:Bobnotts

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Archives


thanks for Epitaph on a Doormouse!

Thanks for doing an edition of Epitaph on a Doormouse. We sang it this week with our sight-singing group, and it's a sweet piece. Some of the singers were familiar with an earlier, out-of-print edition were grateful to have an edition that is easier to read. Vaarky 03:23, 13 September 2008 (PDT)

No problem - it's quite harmless isn't it? Thanks for the feedback. --Bobnotts talk 03:34, 13 September 2008 (PDT)

Modification of the (french) submission guide

Hi, Bob, Two or three hours ago, someone modified the (french) score submission guide, introducing a paragraph specifying that a french person isn't allowed to transfer copyright to CPDL. You can see that modification at the recent changes page. It should be incorrect to have texts changing too much comparing between languages. Regards, Claude 22:02, 24 September 2008 (PDT)

Hi Claude. I don't know anything about French copyright law but I've posted a message on the forums which will hopefully get a response. Thanks for flagging this up. --Bobnotts talk 22:27, 24 September 2008 (PDT)
Honestly speaking, I don't think that any law in a democratic country may limit the freedom of the owner of intellectual property rights to choose the type of copyright license he/she prefers. If you own the property rights of a certain work, you can decide what is allowed and what is not, what is permitted for free and what is not. It's your property, you decide. So, it sounds very strange to me that in France an author cannot choose the CPDL license to copyright his/her works. The CPDL copyright license is just a license - intellectual property always remains with the author. Perhaps the person who added such a note thought that CPDL owns the intellectual property rights for the works hosted at CPDL, but this is wrong. Anyway, I've submitted my considerations to a French guy with significant experience in the field, let's see what's his opinion. --Choralia 07:04, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

Which User talk page is correct for Raf?

Hi Rob, I see you copied messages on User talk:Admin to User talk:Rafael Ornes and put a redirect on the former to the latter. But shouldn't it be the other way around, since User:Admin is Raf's login ID? I thought it was preferable to keep the User talk:<LoginID> as ones main talk page, so that one gets informed when messages are left there. For example, User talk:Robert Nottingham redirects to User talk:Bobnotts, etc. Has the protocol changed? -- Chucktalk Giffen 13:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Chuck. Both accounts "Admin" and "Rafael Ornes" are actually registered (check out the contributions for "Rafael Ornes" and "Admin", though you're right that Raf only seems to have used the former account in 2006. I seem to recall him using this account more frequently... perhaps lost in the crash last year? In any case, yes, that's generally what we've done here (have the login ID as the talk) but I think this should be an exception: having "Rafael Ornes" as both the User: and User talk: sections means that new users are less likely to confuse his talk page for an admin forum or a place to post admin related queries. As both accounts are registered, he should receive a notification if User talk:Rafael Ornes or User talk:Admin are modified. I hope that makes sense! Do you agree? --Bobnotts talk 15:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I see what you mean, Rob. I was aware that Raf was registered under both usernames but that the one account was used only for a period od 19 days in August 2006. Let's hope that users will indeed be less confused. -- Chucktalk Giffen 13:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

A la nanita nana

Please note that it is, on current websites (except the one cited by you), described as traditional (Spanish or whatever), and therefore in the public domain. My score posting pre-dated your information by at least a couple of years, and this notice (December 2006) seems to be the first anyone has heard of Celi's authorship. Indeed, the attribution to Celi seems to have escaped everyone - perhaps even The Cheetah Girls and Howard Goodall (his arrangement on a current CD describes the carol as 'Traditional Spanish'). And after The Cheetah Girls everyone seems to have it as a ring tone. You really must be careful of your own tone, as I remarked in my e-mail to you; though if Celi is indeed the composer (as opposed to arranger) then of course he should be acknowledged as such and I would be the last to wish to infringe his copyright. But this infringement, if it is one, is small fry in comparison with the massive infringements (if they are such) on the internet and airwaves as a whole. Perhaps you should turn your attention to them rather than the very small field that is the CPDL website. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Douglasbrooksd (talkcontribs) on 14:10, 22 October 2008.

I've replied by email to the points you've made here, in your message on A la nanita nana (Douglas Brooks-Davies) and in your email. --Bobnotts talk 16:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

entries for scores in composer page

Bob

There seems to be a new convention (not covered in your score submission guide) for entries in the composer page (as in {filepath:Valls-pu.pdf}}) but when I try to use the convention the links to the score are not correctly displayed, so I continue to use the old convention and every time I make a new entry it has to be corrected. Can you explain the new convention? Jonathang 12:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Could it be that you are mistyping the entry (as above, which is missing a left "{")? The complete correct code for the above link to a PDF is as follows:
[{{filepath:Valls-pu.pdf}} {{pdf}}]
-- Chucktalk Giffen 13:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan. I've just fixed Loquebar de testimoniis (Heinrich Isaac). Have a look at the code - does it make sense? Using the filepath template is mainly a temporary measure to prevent a big mixup when we move back to cpdl.org which is why it doesn't appear in the score submission guide. --Bobnotts talk 16:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

French texts request and Text in French requests

On the French texts requests page, we have no more request but on the Texts request page we have many works in French, as 'La petite fille aux allumettes'. I can't figure out how to make some work-in-French-showing-no-text to appear on the French text requests page. Thanks in advance. - Claude 09:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Claude. The reason that La petite fille aux allumettes (Ludovic Sardain) and many other score pages don't appear on ChoralWiki:French text requests is because they have not been categorised as Works in French. The wiki only knows that they are in French because Template:Language is used to tell it. As an example, I will edit "La petite fille aux allumettes" to use the template and it will appear in ChoralWiki:French text requests. It may be possible in the future for someone with access to the database to change all the "Language" lines on all score pages to use the new template but until that time, it would be a very labourious process to change each one by hand. I hope this answers your question. --Bobnotts talk 09:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Done, with your explanation, thanks : 32 works now appear also on the French text requests list. It's now your turn with the Latin or/and English language template ! - Claude 12:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC) (Just kidding;-)
Ha ha! The clever people who have run the upgrade of the site (Max and Carlos) are looking into ways that this process might be automated so that, hopefully, things like the "language" line won't need to be updated manually. --Bobnotts talk 15:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Mysterious score

Hi Bob, I posted a little something yesterday evening, and saw it correctly displayed in the recent score list on the main page. This morning, it seems to have disappeared, although the 26th is still listed. Any thoughts? Cordially, joachim 09:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Joachim. It appears when I view the Main Page... --Bobnotts talk 09:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
I swear it didn't 15 mins ago. And now it does, indeed. Strrrrrrrrrrrrrange. joachim 09:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
"Cache effect", I guess. As far as I understood, if a cached version of a page exists and you are not logged-in, the cached version is shown; if you are logged-in, the "real page" is shown regardless the contents of the cache. So, you can occasionally see the same page differently depending whether you are logged-in or not, until the cached page is refreshed with the latest modifications applied to the real page. --Choralia 10:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Archived pages

Hi Rob, only today I noticed this archiving system, it's indeed interesting to have these talks kept for future reference. I was just imagining if it wouldn't be better if these pages belonged to a different namespace. The advantages would be that they would not be listed in the standard Search, and having a specific namespace for them makes it easier to find the pages, thus making the use of a category for them unnecessary. See for example these pages on the wikinew clone that were moved to a new namespace called "Archived": [1]
After the move, the namespace can be renamed to any other name (as for instance the current "DelArchive") and all pages will be moved together automatically, just like what has happened when the namespace "Requests" was renamed to "Request". What about it? —Carlos Email.gif 19:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Jumping in here, since I set up the Delete system, including the DelArchive. Yes, it would be nice to have a separate namespace for the archived deletion discussions. I suppose DelArchive: is as good a name as any (and won't require changing all those archives! -- Chucktalk Giffen 22:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've just created the namespace "Archived" and its corresponding 'talk' namespace, and moved all pages in Category:Archived deletion discussions in there. —Carlos Email.gif 00:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

New works & Text requests

Hi Rob, I've recently dug into the Latin text requests. It's an uphill battle, but I'm hoping to get there one day. As I usually encounter fairly short texts, I was wondering if the new Add Works form (if it's ever to be implemented) might contain a lyrics field, enabling contributors to add the text without having to make an additional edit to the works page - perhaps not all contributors feel 'safe' enough to edit pages, which might explain why so many of them don't contain lyrics. Even if only a small number of contributors were to use the lyrics field on the form, it would still mean some considerable time saving. Cordially, joachim 15:33, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Joachim. Thanks for the suggestion. I'm afraid that I've not made any progress recently with the new add works form with Arie Fokkens. Part of the reason that I stopped was that lots of new templates were being implemented so I thought I'd let things settle down. Meanwhile, Carlos has been able to access and change the current add works form which may mean that we simply alter that rather than create a new one. I'll ask him if it would be possible to add a box for text & translation(s). --Bobnotts talk 16:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Saving Scores from Cpdl.org

Hello Bobnotts:

Greetings to you and yours. I have a particular problem regarding downlaoding scores. I downloaded Adobe Reader 9 to my computer, but when I try to open a score (eg. Father in Heav'n-Flemming), my computer keeps refering to Adobe 4, so I cannot see the score. Can i save the score without opening it, Then reopen in Adobe 9, so I can print the score. By the way, my Operating Systen is Windows Vista. Thank you for any information —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Njemdi (talkcontribs) on 18:41, 14 November 2008.

Hi Njemdi, please remember to sign your remarks by adding 4 "tilde" symbols, or pressing the equivalent signature button on the top of the page, otherwise nobody knows who you are. It seems that Rob (a.k.a. Bobnotts) is very busy with thousands of text replacements (he has found a new toy...). To save the score without opening it, right-click on the pdf icon and then select "save as...". I did it, and the file opened in Acrobat Reader 9 without any problems. I guess you have two versions of Adobe Acrobat installed, and this it may be rather tricky, especially if you installed an older version after having installed a newer one. I would suggest to re-install Acrobat 9. Max a.k.a. Choralia 23:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Njemdi, I'd try simply uninstalling all the versions of Acrobat Reader you have installed then reinstall the latest version. --Bobnotts talk 13:10, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Liturgical music

Hi Rob, I noticed your changes to Audit in evangelio. The concept of 'liturgical music' is of course so very vague it is pretty much asking for a discussion. I've always interpreted 'motet' to be mass repertoire, whereas I've labelled pieces such as this one, for want of the term 'responsory' in the drop-down menu, as 'liturgical music'. Much as I understand the ambiguity of those terms, I'd like to know if there's any kind of consensus as to the use of either term. Cordially, joachim 14:55, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Joachim. Straight after doing that, I wondered whether I should just revert my edit as it occurred to me that I didn't really know what liturgical music is on CPDL. The sacred genres are an area of CPDL that needs some attention IMO. Anyway, I started a thread on the forums which I hope you'll be interested to contribute to. --Bobnotts talk 15:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

User talk:MistyMountain

Hi Rob, I noticed that you deleted Dedman's page per request. But what about his talk page? User:MistyMountain will exist "forever" on the system, and who knows, in the future he may decide to collaborate with CPDL in other ways, so I'm of the opinion that talk pages of registered users should always be kept. —Carlos Email.gif 16:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've restored it. --Bobnotts talk 16:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Byrd Mass for 4 in F minor

Rob,
Done the Byrd 4-parter down in the good old Fellowesian key of F minor. Had a young hotshot singer asking about the version down a 4th, so though I would do the 2 together. --DaveF 21:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Dave. I know a lot of performances are at this pitch so I'm sure this transposition will be useful for others too. --Bobnotts talk 11:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Ave Maria by S. Gangi

Hi Rob,

just saw that you have added the piece by Gangi to CPDL. The PDF file says that this work is registered with SIAE. Thus it may not be performed in the public without a license form SIAE (or its associates in other countries like PRS, GEMA etc.). In Germany, even religious use is forbidden without a license of the GEMA.

I have corrected the copyright from "CPDL" to "Personal" and added a copyright notice to avoid that visitors are fooled into believing that this piece may be freely performed (which might be a natural assumption when looking for scores on CPDL).

I personally think that this kind of licensing is inappropriate for CPDL, but this might be a minority view point. Nevertheless I hope you agree that we should make the licensing terms clear to visitors. If not, feel free to remove the copyright notice that I have added.

Thanks,

Chris

Hi Chris. Thanks for your interest and diligence in this matter. The other admins agree that CPDL isn't the place for composers who wish to claim royalties from their works so they have been removed. There is another work by Gangi which he has re-uploaded since I deleted it. Max is in touch with him by email (since his first language is Italian) and I hope at least some of his works will be included at CPDL. I definitely agree that the license of a work or edition should be made abundantly clear to visitors and if you see a similar situation in the future, please take similar action. Many thanks --Bobnotts talk 13:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of this problem and discussing it among the admins. Concerning free licenses for individual works, there is an important point to consider. In general, if composers decide to join a royalty collecting society, they must ransfer all their performance rights to the society. This means that they no longer have the right to define custom licensing terms for performance of their works. AFAIK, the GEMA (the German PRS) contract explicitly demands that the member transfers the performance rights of all of his/her works. Moreover, the GEMA forbids its members to publish under custom licenses (which is understandable, because keeping track of individual licensing terms for each work probably is an organisational nightmare). A choir in which I had sung actually was once bitten by this policy: a composer had given a composition to the choir director for free performance in a concert, but was apparently ignorant that when becoming a GEMA member, he had lost the right to do so; eventually the choir had to pay a hefty penalty fee for copyright infringement to the GEMA. If Max can read Italian, maybe he can have a look at the SIAE membership contract; I would guess that they have similar terms as the GEMA. Chris 19:06, 29 December 2008 (GMT)
Thanks, Chris. I think this has been sorted out now - Mr Gangi's works that are on CPDL now are ones which he hasn't submitted to the SIAE. Apparently this is not in contravention of his contract with them. --Bobnotts talk 17:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

image file

Robert,

I would like to place a jpg image on my composer page, but when I attempt to upload, I get a notice that the file is corrupt or has the wrong extension. File uses .jpg extension, and is not corrupt to my knowledge. Help! Also interested in learning how to add mp3 file to existing work. Add Works form can accommodate mp3, but Upload file does not permit the extension.Tweedfour 04:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I've asked Carlos to look into this, Thurlow. I wouldn't have thought that it will take him too long to sort out the problem. --Bobnotts talk 17:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Thurlow, the necessary settings were added, and mp3 extension is now accepted for upload. Please try again and inform me if something goes wrong. Carlos 21:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hymn subcategories

Robert, As my hymn collection grows, there are going to be any number of hymns that are seasonal (Lent, Advent, Easter, etc.) as well as specific for Communion. Would it be appropriate for me to arrange my hymns into subcategories as I did under Shape Notes? I realise the "Category" code will automatically link things to Easter, etc, but for organisational purposes on the page I wondering if it might be helpful to music seekers to subcat. It would be easy enough for me to re-organise the Hymn section of the page.Tweedfour 20:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Permit me to wade in here, since I've been somewhat the arbiter of the way hymns are handled here and also rather active in classifying sacred works by season. If you are concerned about how to group works on your composer page, I think you have considerable latitude to make such groupings. On a slightly different note, if one uses the code
{{#dpl: category=Hymns|categorymatch=Lent%}}
one obtains all works classified in Hymns and also in any of the Lent catetgories (as of the time of this posting, there are only two such hymns so classified - one by Thurlow Weed and one by myself!). But making a ChoralWiki namespace page such as ChoralWiki:Lenten hymns and linking it both to Hymns and to Lent makes good sense (one could do the same with other combinations, much as was done for ChoralWiki:Music for the Advent and Christmas season which appeared on the Main Page. -- Chucktalk Giffen 16:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
What he said :-) --Bobnotts talk 20:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the input, Chuck. I agree making seasonal categories for hymns would make sense. You might also want to consider the most common "non-season," namely, Communion Hymns. I've just come across a treasure trove of 1,215 annotated hymn texts published in 1893. Even after the five hymns I wrote this w/e, there are currently 12 bookmarks; thus my question about organising hymns!
With regard to the above code, where would that be placed? I presume on the actual work page? As part of "Genre?"Tweedfour 23:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

"Legend" template

Hi Rob,

Have you noted this? I'm not sure it is OK. Max a.k.a. --Choralia 20:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Adding keyboard accomp tag to works

Hi,

I'm puzzled that you have added this recently to Brookfield (Billings) and China (Cuzens) (and maybe others!) - although the scores I posted didnot have any keyboard reductions (and I'm not sure that Billings and/or Cuzens would have approved !).

Please can you explain to me. Tim Henderson 23:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tim. My mistake - I assumed that because these scores have been labelled as hymns, they would usually be performed with some sort of keyboard accompaniment. Please do change these to {{acap}} if that is appropriate. Every score page should have an accompaniment template, even if this is {{acap}} - this is a problem that I've been trying to correct. --Bobnotts talk 13:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for clearing it up. Much of Billings in the "Sacred Harp" tradition is nowadays performed acapella with the four parts belting it out around the "hollow square" containing the leader - although it may well be that in his time the parts were supported by whatever instruments the parish had at its disposal as in the West Gallery tradition that much of my other stuff comes from. I'll chnage them to acap.
Is it possible to include an accompaniment/acapella option that forces a choice to be made in the "automated" works entry form ?Tim Henderson 15:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Enrico Vercesi

Hi Rob, usually I create pages as the one cited above when I need to add some usefull information not found on the composer page, as his contact email. I do it because people downloading his works may want to contact him for some reason. Shouldn't his email be included in his composer page, then? I think the Category:Editors could well stay on the User page, below the redirect. Another thing one must not forget to do in these cases is to create a redirect from the composer talk page back to the user talk page. Carlos 16:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you're right Carlos. I thought I'd included his email address on his composer page... apparently not. Now that we have more control over the wiki, it might be a good time to change the categorisation of contributors/editors/composers. I remember discussing somewhere that it's wrong to exclude contributors of texts/translations or biographies from getting a user page and labelling it "editor". How about "Category:CPDL contributors"? --Bobnotts talk 16:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Spacing in Editor template

Hi Rob. I see you put back in three nbsp's in Editor - after I had reduced the number to two. I disasgree with your changing it back to three on a couple of grounds: (1) "Style" manuals I'm familiar with recommend (or prescribe) only two spaces; (2) making all the spaces (especially the last one) nbsp's means that any other space that appears after the template and before the next item will be piled upon the three already there - at very least, the last space should NOT be an nbsp. If you insist on three (which I seriously object to), then at least make the three spaces be one nbsp followed by two ordinary spaces (wiki treats more than three ordinary spaces as a double space). Of course, I'd much prefer it to be just one nbsp and one ordinary space. -- Chucktalk Giffen 23:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Chuck. I wasn't aware of a new style manual for CPDL. The style which has been in place as long as I can remember is to have 3 spaces after the date in edition info. I understand your second point, though I don't understand why anyone would put a space in between the editor template and the "ScoreInfo" or "Copy" templates. In any case, I have altered the editor template to include a normal space, followed by a forced space, followed by another normal space. There should now be a maximum of 3 spaces after the date in any circumstance. I'm not entirely sure why you're so keen to implement a change to the style which has a minimal effect but I am sure that any such change should only be implemented when it can be done universally. There are many score pages which don't use the editor template so these would be inconsistent. I think we should only start discussing style when we have complete control over it. --Bobnotts talk 13:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
HI Rob. I appreciate where you are coming from. In case you hadn't noticed, I've begun putting the Editor template on all score pages which have scores with submission dates since 2005 (2005, 2007, 2008 are essentially complete - next is 2006). Once these are done, I'll begin working backwards until all the score pages have Editor templates on them. In the course of doing this I've made some modifications (extensions) to the template, such as one that allows for alternate wording, such as "Contributor" for "Editor".
As for not seeing why "anyone" would put a space after the Editor template ... well, I have put one space after it and before "Score information" or the ScoreInfo template - on the grounds that it makes the code more legible (cramming one template after another with no space between them does not lend itself to legibility). One nbsp followed by two ordinary spaces will not cause the extra (ordinary) space that I have inserted to be converted to a fourth space in the output - but one nbsp between two ordinary spaces in the template will cause the extra (ordinary) space I've added to be converted in the output - so, I'm changing it to one nbsp followed by two ordinary ones.
As for uniformity across CPDL on such things - this does indeed vary widely, especially for those (mostly in the past, but some in the present) who do their own posting (rather than using the output from the addworks mechanism) ... how many times have we removed extra blank lines, which the wiki inserts after the first one (the first blank line functions more like a line break with a little more vertical space).
I guess I wonder when and where you think we should start with putting some style decisions into place, especially for those which require considerable hands-on editing (such as the Editor template which cannot be put in with a simple ReplaceText). My own opinion is that we should start sometime sooon(rather than never or very much later), and in the case of the Editor template, my current efforts will soon cover rather more than half the number of editions.
My work on inserting the editor template has also been aimied at making some sense out of the NewScoresLog archive, which generates info with DPL (via the categorization provided by the Editor template). Ah, well, things for ruminating and discussing further!! -- Chuck
Hi Rob and Chuck, let me step in here too, because this subject also preoccupies me. I've seen both of you doing a lot of repetitive edits lately, and I didn't know how to say it, but if you could wait a bit more, we may find a tool that will do this kind of job for us. It will be basically the same as ReplaceText, but with the ability to use Regular Expressions for advanced search/replace, as I already do in UltraEdit when editing works pages. I found one such tool by chance, while testing the Extension:Multi-Category Search. The tool is called DotNetWikiBot Framework and seems to be easy to use yet a powerful editor. It just happens that I don't have right now the time to test it; I intend to do it after (1) I finish the Add Work/Add Edition forms; and (2) finish the development of a couple of "encapsulation" templates for edition and work input data, in order to isolate the data from the page style. I saw that Chuck and others before him have made experiments with similar templates, I don't know why it hasn't evolved into something practical. After we have such templates ready, it would be time to put this dotnetwikibot to work, editing virtually all CPDL works pages to introduce the new templates in them. If any of you has the time and will, I invite you to begin studying this bot: how to install, run and customize it. Carlos 16:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi folks. Carlos, I think the work of mine you are referring to is that dealing with "data structures" and with "variable templates" - ie. templates as actual parameters, not quite the same thing as "template variables". This work is still going on (just not online at the moment, since I'm trying to get the CPDL organizational document done). Indeed, I've been wishing for an extension that does "replacetext" with regular expressions, so that large scale changes could be done. My work with the Editor template was spurred on by the need to have the Archive (NewScoresLog) fulfill its purpose. I'm hoping we can wait on some of the other things until I can roll out my proposed changes for CPDL data structures (different ones for composers, editors, scores, translations, etc.) that can interact through templates passed to these data structures that make it poossible to produce, say, both the entry on a composer page and the entry on a works page for an edition from just one data structure. -- Chucktalk Giffen 20:04, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Chuck: going back to the original point, take a look at this page. It's not formatted correctly because the templates don't have any spaces between them in the code. I believe new score pages are created in this way too. The score pages that you've edited have the right spacing after the date because of the changes made to the editor template, but other pages are now not formatted correctly. Is there a solution that we can implement into the editor template so that no matter what follows the template on a score page, the spacing will be correct?
By the way, the NewScoresLog will be a very useful tally when it's complete. --Bobnotts talk 12:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)