User talk:Foobarnix/Archive 3

French theatres[edit]

Thank you indeed for your work on French theatres. (I've been working on Category:Lists of operas by composer which note many historic theatres.) Are you planning to do more of these articles? Do you accept requests, I wonder? If so, one might be to develop the Théâtre Dejazet page. Best regards. --Klein zach 01:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kleinzach; Thanks for your interest. I am going to look into your request. However, my interest is more in the plays of French dramatists. See my page User:Foobarnix/Project on 20th century French drama, especially the last section. You might also drop a note to User:Lockley—he is tremendously helpful and is interested in architecture. You can mention me. Watch this page for more.__Foobarnix (talk) 02:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added a little to Théâtre Dejazet. I wasn't aware it was the same place as the 'Folies-Nouvelles'. It would help if we knew when the names changed. I'll leave a note with User:Lockley. --Klein zach 02:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kleinzach: Nice work on Théâtre Déjazet. I found a very nice bit of history for it at Théâtre Dejazet history fragment. Hope it helps. The French language version is quite extensive, but... (1) My Chrome translation comes out somewhat incomprehensible (do you speak French?) and (2) I do not think the original French version is all that well organized or documented in any case. I added the official website, a new section, and some remarks.

I also found a fantastic timeline for the Déjazet HERE. I also think the article probably should get a cleanup tag. In fact, I think I messed it up a tiny bit. By the way, you might want to temporarily have a watch on this talk page?--Foobarnix (talk) 01:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My French is not great, but I can read (slowly . . .). The timeline looks great , especially if we can extract dates for the name changes from it. For some other articles we have listed premieres, see for example Teatro San Moisè. BTW another article worth starting is Salle des Concerts Herz (see here). --Klein zach 02:07, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kleinzach I am so glad someone is taking an interest in these tricky theatre names. You might be interested in the discussion I had with User:Robert.Allen at Talk:Théâtre Marigny. He is another tremendously helpful person who has an interest in these theatres. (Oops, I just now noticed that you have discovered Robert yourself!) I will look into Salle des Concerts Herz on the rue de la Victoire. --Foobarnix (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Salle des Concerts Herz[edit]

I started researching possible article and this is what I came up with so far.

An anti-slavery conference was held in Paris on 27 August 1867 in the Salle des Concerts Herz by the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, since renamed Anti-Slavery International, as you can see Here
On 3 February 1844 the first public performance of the saxophone took place in Paris at the Salle des Concerts Herz, as indicated Here and Here.
The Salle des Concerts Herz, or Salle Herz for short, was located on the site of the present no. 48, rue de la Victoire. It was built in 1842 on commission from Henri and Jacques Herz.
The hall was used for concerts and other public performances. Offenbach, for instance, performed some of his works there and also appeared as a cellist. The hall was still used in 1873, but has since been demolished.
Hector Berlioz conducted the première of two of his compositions at the Salle Herz – the overture Le Carnaval romain on 3 February 1844 and L'enfance du Christ on 10 December 1854, as you can see Here.
Jules Danbé was mounting concerts at the Salle Herz in 1874 as you can see Here.
Rossini's Stabat Mater was first performed at Salle Herz on 31 October 1841, as you can see Here.

That's impressive. An article would be very worthwhile - maybe under the full name with a redirect from Salle Herz? I could start the article, but maybe you should do it to take credit for the research you've done? Best. --Klein zach 04:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In haste I've started the article at Salle des Concerts Herz. Please feel free to add to it! --Klein zach 11:32, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your edits, but i've had to take out a couple of things (1) Stabat Mater because the hall date and the performance contradict. We'll need to check the dates, and (2) we have to avoid referring to sites like Freebase that mirror WP as 'self-references' are not allowed on WP. Best. --Klein zach 23:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing edits[edit]

I did not know that Freebase was a mirror of Wikipedia? The contradiction in dates is strange. Which one do you think is wrong? I have tried and tried to find another reference to when the hall was built, so far unsuccessfully--Foobarnix (talk) 23:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Either date could be wrong. Do you have access to Grove? That might help. BTW do you think it was a theatre? I thought it was just a hall. --Klein zach 23:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought 'hall' was just one of the ways French refer to theatres. You are saying a concert hall and a theatre are distinctly different things? Out of my depth. What is 'Grove' and how would I get access to it? ('Grove' gets 10000000 hits on Google). Maybe if we tried to find a Paris architectural historical society site. How hard can it be to find out when a building was built?--Foobarnix (talk) 00:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A hall wouldn't have had a stage, note that the Offenbach performance there was 'in concert'. 'Salle' often did refer to a theatre - you are right there - however I think this case was different. By Grove I mean Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Unfortunately I don't have a subscription and I'm nowhere near a library. Re your last question, I don't know, I've never done a check on Parisian buildings. --Klein zach 00:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations[edit]

Here's a link to a page which discusses the issue: Wikipedia:Copyright violations. I have not reread it, but I seem to remember that one is supposed to delete all sentences and/or sections which are extensive violations and rewrite them from scratch. Obviously this can sometimes be a judgment call, if it "too close" paraphrasing is involved. But completely replicated phrases, sentences, and paragraphs probably have to go. (These are unlikely to have occurred by chance.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 08:47, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. Normally we would simply remove all the pasted text. Théâtre des Champs-Élysées was an unusual case because it wasn't discovered for 6 years and the article had been edited around the copy and paste. --Klein zach 23:33, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some more theatres in Paris[edit]

Here are some more venues that need articles, assuming you are still interested. They all have articles on French WP:

Best etc. --Klein zach 00:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will get on it (soon). Also still working on the problem with Théâtre des Champs-Élysées. I am near a library. Will check out Grove tonight. Thanks for all that you do.--Foobarnix (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have started Théâtre des Capucines, but more referencing is needed. --Klein zach 03:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I could see that when it turned blue. Dude, you are amazing. For Théâtre d'Application take a look at Here. Useful, I think.--Foobarnix (talk) 04:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now working on the important but tricky Théâtre de Paris here. --Klein zach 11:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the star! Very kind. --Klein zach 14:16, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kleinzach - Three things

Have you considered creating an article for Théâtre national de Chaillot? I keep bumping into it. There are at least 20 mentions of it in Wikipedia - 6 of them red links.
Are you still working on Théâtre d'Application? I have some time now and could start this article if you wish.
Your comments (below) about Nino Rota discography were very helpful. As you can see, I have put sort tags in col 2, have absorbed all recordings into the table, and have broken the discography into sections by genre as you suggested. Thanks for the help.--Foobarnix (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done any more recently on the Paris theatres. (The italics controversy has been eating into my time a bit.) The Chaillot doesn't seem to have done any music, so I'll probably leave to someone else to have a go with that one. Regards. --Klein zach 14:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nino Rota[edit]

Hello Viva-Verdi. User:Kleinzach said that you might be a good person to ask about a page I am working on: Nino Rota discography. I split this page off from Nino Rota. The outline on this page (arranged by label) was all originally added to Nino Rota by an anonymous editor on 11 August 2009. I am trying to completely revise it using the guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies.

Could you possibly be kind enough to take a look at the table part of Nino Rota discography (in the section Albums) and tell me if I am on the right track. I have just started this table; hopefully it will eventually replace the outline. I will immediately remove this table if there is copyvio (see below).
All the data in the table so far (much rearranged) has come from the web site Presto Classico. Do I involve Wikipedia:Copyright violations by depending so heavily on this site? I really do not know what other source to use. Can I just cite Presto Classico and take care of the problem, if any? Perhaps there is book that has all this information?

Any advice you can give me will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time.--Foobarnix (talk) 23:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Foobarnix:

I'd be happy to throw in some ideas.

The "look" of the table (and its sortability) is much much better than the list of individual companies which follows it. A table is the most straighforward way of presentng the info. At the WikiProject Opera our guidelines (which I assume that you have seen) include the columns which you have set up, although I don't think that you need a separate column for "Label" and "Notes" (but that's a matter of taste, I think).

I don't think that you have a copywright issue as long as there is a reference to the source (see Aida discography, for instance, where we put the ref. as part of the "Label" heading).

In looking at the website and its listings, I see that there is a lot of repititon (e.g. The Godfather music) on albums which only have one or two pieces by Rota and lots by other composers). I'm not sure that they should be included (and you havn't done so anyway); maybe just stick to albums devoted to only Rota - or just include those where there are no recordings on a complete Rota album, so that someone can find it easily.

I hope that this is helpful. Good luck with your project, and do feel free to contact me again. I'll save the article on my watchlist and keep an eye on it. All the best - Viva-Verdi

Viva-Verdi - Thank you so much—very helpful indeed. I completely agree about repetition. I was already thinking of not including albums with just one or two Rota pieces, and you have confirmed my intuition. I really appreciate your watching this page. Please do not hesitate to offer criticism.--Foobarnix (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nino Rota discography[edit]

Hi Viva-Verdi and Kleinzach. Could you kindly take a glance and comment if you happen to have time and want to suggest anything.

This is my first discograpy-am I overdoing it with detail?
I would welcome suggestions on how to break the Nino Rota discography tables into logical pieces. Perhaps I should use something like Kathleen Battle discography as a model.
I have tried to eliminate duplicates of the same recording but it is tricky. I may have missed some.--Foobarnix (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well done! You've been doing a lot of work. Some comments:

1. The Kathleen Battle discography is not sortable and in any case is very different from Nino Rota. If you want to use sortability it makes sense to have the whole thing in one section, basically by recording title. The alternative might be to have subject sections - film music, chamber music or whatever etc.
2. As far as I can see you have not added sort tags. These will be necessary for sorting on surnames rather than first names, avoiding sorting on definite/indefinite articles etc. Michael Bednarek is the expert on these tags. He will be the best person to ask about them.
3. Are you still moving sections into the tables? Are the ASV to Sony sections still to be done?
4. What is the difference between part 1 and part 2? Will you be combining them? --Klein zach 23:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I eliminate sections as I do them. Have not found good documentation for Sony, ASV, and some others yet. Am working on it.
I made the two sections totally arbitrarily because one big section was getting to slow and unwieldy when editing. I plan to merge it all when I am done.
I will look into sort tags. Thanks as always.--Foobarnix (talk) 23:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work; this is looking so much better. Viva-Verdi (talk) 15:03, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've done a lot of work! Very impressive. The only thing I have some reservations about is the 'artist discography infobox' with the film poster (rather than a picture of Rota), but I guess that's just a matter of taste. --Klein zach 14:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Coming by chance to this Nino Rota discography page today, I'm immediately struck by your "Year" column giving the dates of CD issues, which are already listed in the "Label" column. If your concern is the abilty to sort discs by year of issue, and want to retain "Year" as a separate column, I would suggest moving it over to the far right, following "Label", since it's really by far the least significant. Next, although a "wikitable sortable" is indeed sortable on any designated column, it ought to be arranged in some sort of logical sequence to start with, so that when it first appears on the page it's already in its most intuitive arrangement. This would be "Album Title & Selections", which should be alphabetized, and would now be the leftmost column after "Year" is either moved to the right, or deleted. Third, it would be extremely useful for you to point readers to two other Rota lists on separate pages, List of compositions by Nino Rota and List of film scores by Nino Rota, which both give the all-important years of original composition. This would probably best be done by adding a See also at the top of the article. I think all of these would be useful improvements to what is already a helpful and well-done article. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:16, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Dates of music will normally be date of composition as the most significant, next date of recording (and venue, if known), with date of CD issue being by far the least important. These things come and go, and are frequently being repackaged and reissued. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To User:Milkunderwood: I have incorporated all of your suggestions. Thanks for helping.--Foobarnix (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was fast work. For the movies, at least, you ought to be able to supply additional information from http://www.imdb.com - for instance, La Dolce Vita was 1960, and the "musical director" was Franco Ferrara. Searching there on Rota's name, they list him as composer for a total of 172 movie titles. Hope that helps. Milkunderwood (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and added links to your page from the other two "See also"s. Milkunderwood (talk) 22:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Foobarnix-

Now I've come across a confusion. Looking at the page List of film scores by Nino Rota, I notice there are no refs at all citing where all that material came from. So seeing that the page had been set up by Kleinzach (who certainly knows better), I asked him what was going on, because it looked to me that the whole page might have been taken line-for-line straight from IMDb.com. But Kleinzach tells me that he had simply set up the initial page as a split-off from the main Nino Rota page for your project, and that I should come talk to you. However, your name doesn't appear in the History at all. Maybe he's confused about which Rota page is the problem? In any event, someone - whoever initially conjured up the list - will need to reference the source(s) used. If you don't know who that was, then I'm not sure what comes next. Maybe you should talk to Kleinzach yourself? It's a puzzling situation.

And now looking at List of compositions by Nino Rota, a separate article, I see that this is exactly the same situation, where it was set up by Kleinzach, your name doesn't appear in its History, and again there are no citations at all. This is even more puzzling, because this list cannot have come from IMDb. Might you have any idea what's happening here? I'm thinking that surely Kleinzach would have copied all the needed refs from the original Rota page, if they had been there to start with. Maybe a search through the history of Nino Rota could yield some clues, or even answers. But obviously both of these lists will need to be referenced back to their source.

Your Nino Rota discography, on the other hand, has gobs of good sources cited. Now I'm starting to wonder whether these might have originally pointed to items on all three pages, and Kleinzach messed up when splitting them by leaving the cites on the discography page only, orphaning the other two. Hm. I don't know what to suggest, but if you feel you have any skin in those two list pages, and don't know how to fix them, maybe you'd better get back together with Kleinzach. Probably the best way to approach it before having to appeal to him would be to search back through the history of the main Rota page, and see what refs pointed to which entries prior to the split.

Anyway, I'm glad I was able to give you a couple of hints for your table. Milkunderwood (talk) 03:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merging Reduction (philosophy) and Reductionism[edit]

I'd obviously agree, unless someone wants to question whether Descarts, whose gosling shows up nicely in the non-philosophy version, was not actually a philosopher. (JdV was another automaton he built, wasn't he?) The only problem, IMHO, is that both articles are quite long already.

I write in your talk page because there is no mention of such merge in either discussion page.

ale (talk) 15:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re: Pizza connection[edit]

No worries - all been fixed. Thanks! Lugnuts (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of theatres and entertainment venues in Paris[edit]

I'm now working on this - quite a lot of work. The idea is to make it sortable by address etc, per the idea you had before. Please join in if you have time. --Klein zach 03:14, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kleinzach - Impressive start! The posters are great! Very attractive page. Very usable format. Some questions:

1 Are this page and List of demolished entertainment venues in Paris mutually exclusive?

Yes. KZ

2 Have you already included all theatres that have articles in the French Wikipedia?

Yes, but also red-linked items in the French Wiki lists. KZ

3 Have you tried to enlist the help of Lockley and Robert.Allen? In the past Anneyh was occasionally helpful, especially with translation from French.

Not yet, though Robert.Allen will have seen my work as he was following those pages. KZ

4 Would it make sense to ask for help from Wikipedia:WikiProject France?

No, I don't think they are much interested in the (less popular) performing arts. KZ

5 Would it be helpful in the lead section (or even have subsections) to discuss specific examples of

Two very different theatres that existed successively on one site (e.g., Théâtre de l'Athénée)
Different companies that used the same name and different venues (e.g., Théâtre des Nouveautés)
A name which can refer to the company itself, or the building which the company built (e.g., Théâtre Feydeau)?

No (or should I say not yet?) because location will be the key thing in this list. This will primarily be a list that is sortable by location, but we can gradually add other info to it that is compatible with existing now/located at parameters. However my thinking at the moment is that we will need a separate list of theatre companies (i.e. people based not location based.) KZ

It may be impossible to completely clear up the various confusions in theatre names—even using examples—so take my suggestions with a grain de sel.

Actually I think it will be possible to clarify everything, but this list is only the start. KZ

Note to myself: The precipitating discussion can be found here.--Foobarnix (talk) 23:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking some good questions! I will reformatting the list as a table — then it should be clearer what I doing and what the potential can be. Thanks. --Klein zach 03:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More comments on list of theatres[edit]

Kleinzach -- Thank you for such complete answers to my questions. I am surprised that you are also including 'red-linked' items from the French Wiki list. In other words, you intend to make the English Wikipedia more athoritative than the French Wikipedia! Kudos to you! BTW, I am frequently disappointed in the quality of theatre articles in the French Wikipedia. For example, the article Théâtre de l'Atelier which I just "imported" is a syntactical mess. (My shameful secret is that I secretly hope that smart diligent people like you will make it better once I start such an article.) In any case, English version is already much better for French theatre in general. I had already noticed this when I was working on the plays of Jean Giraudoux. I think you are right that Wikiproject France is not interested in this stuff. You said two things that have enormously clarified all of these issues for me:

"location will be the key thing in this list". Upon reflection, I completely agree with this strategy.
"we will need a separate list of theatre companies". Again, I agree. This list can clear up some of the ambiguities I referred to. This latter list will be much less extensive, I suppose.

Are there any more examples of the gorgeous posters that you have placed down the right side of the page? I see no reason not to continue such posters all the way to the bottom of the list. I love your format. BTW, I finally gave in to your suggestion for the illustration in the Nino Rota discography article. You say "this list is only the start". I will look forward to further developments. Let me know if there is some grunt work that I can do to help. (I have a lot of patience for tedious cleanup kinds of tasks.) Is it helpful having rough theatre articles imported from French—or is it more of a distraction? If you want me to, I would be glad to "import" all of the missing French theatre articles and do initial cleanup like I recently did for Théâtre de l'Atelier.--Foobarnix (talk) 21:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opera coverage (of French operas) is already better on the English wiki than the French. I think this will happen more and more in the future. The posters were not put there by me. They look good, but I am wondering if they will be appropriate with the emphasis on present-day. Maybe we need architectural shots? But that is for later.

The two new articles you've done on the theatres are excellent. They are substantial and useful for the reader. Adding more like them would be helpful, though some of the places on the list will not be as interesting. --Klein zach 03:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paris taskforce[edit]

Hi, I've just joined the Paris taskforce, which is here. Would you like to join as well? I think it would be a good place for us to discuss theatres etc. Putting information there should be more useful than putting it on our talk pages. We might also possibly get some language help. Best. --Klein zach 02:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Art & Sciences Council logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Art & Sciences Council logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

Gary Noffke (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

was linked to NEA, Sheboygan, Montana State University

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the Nino Rota mess[edit]

I guess my point is that someone needs to take responsibility for straightening out all that uncited information. My first question would be, who - you or Kleinzach, or someone else - initiated the idea of splitting up the Rota page? That is, who was it that had sufficient interest in Rota to begin with, who decided splitting would be a good idea? I guess I had assumed it was you, and that Kleinzach got involved only to the extent of handling the mechanics of the split-offs. If that's a correct assumption, then it seems to me that you're the one left holding the bag, unfortunately, and are in the best position to take that responsibility.

So let's assume that someone, presently unknown, found and posted all the list information on Rota's page, and failed to ever reference any of it, or otherwise indicate where any of it came from. If it were me (and it's not), I would start by going back further into the Rota history, to find who had originally posted all that detailed stuff, and, assuming they're still around and active, ask them where they found it. You might get good responses or you might not. Let's assume that you do not either succeed in contacting the original poster, or don't get useful answers from them. At this point you would need to work in reverse, and find any and all online sources that could have been originally used, or that in any case can now be used to cite all that stuff. On the other hand, if the lists had originally come from a book and is not findable online, that becomes a larger problem.

I suppose in that case then, the first thing to do then will be to tag those two uncited list articles as needing citations, and then take the question to one of the community discussion boards for ideas and suggestions. Anyway, this is just my own take on the situation, and maybe I'm wrong. I'll post to Kleinzach's talkpage and ask for his input on this. Good luck with your project (if indeed it will be yours). Milkunderwood (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it was editor 116.240.220.108, who doesn't have a talkpage, and the additions were made on 11 August 2009. You might be up s**t creek without a paddle. Milkunderwood (talk) 17:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now looking above, I see you already knew that. I suppose my feeling is, don't stick your hands into a dirt pile if you don't want to get your hands dirty. It seems like Kleinzach should have realized at the time that he was leaving those other articles orphaned without any refs. Milkunderwood (talk) 17:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand all this, and I don't have time to do a lot of research on it, so I will make a few general points. First, (content) writing and (technical) copy editing work are different — best done separately for accuracy and structural coherence. In the case of Rota, I had no sources to hand, and as far as I can remember I contributed no content. Dividing the material up made it easier for other people to work on the material. The result (as far as I can see) is a good biography, an excellent discography by Foobarnix, and some leftovers. So what is the big deal here? When we find unreferenced pages, we normally put {{Unreferenced}} tags on them, so that other editors will see there is a job waiting to be done. Many, many pages are inadequately referenced. That doesn't mean they should be deleted or anyone should call the fire brigade.

Milkunderwood: "Kleinzach should have realized at the time that he was leaving those other articles orphaned without any refs." Nonsense. Milkunderwood doesn't understand how the encyclopedia is compiled. The articles were not left 'orphaned'. ('Orphan' is a term used for unlinked articles, it has nothing to do with references.) AFAIK they were all properly linked to the biography. WP editors are volunteers. They are under no obligation to contribute in a particular way, to a particular level, to include this or exclude that. Sometimes editors do a lot of work on one article, sometimes they do a little. Much depends on the editor's knowledge of a particular subject.

Maybe Milkunderwood would like to ban all non-referencing editors? Perhaps editors should be required to prove they have access to a relevant library? My nearest university library is about 200 km away! I guess I wouldn't qualify! --Klein zach 00:16, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've posted a response to Kleinzach on my own talkpage, if you might be interested in looking at it. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, do look at it - it might include something that could be helpful to you, lower down. Milkunderwood (talk) 06:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Theatre companies in Michigan[edit]

A tag has been placed on Theatre companies in Michigan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Moreover, please add more verifiable sources, not only 3rd party sources. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Luna ibis 16:55, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This page was a naming mistake. I was going to ask to have it removed.--Foobarnix (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mention it. I figured it was just a mistake. Luna ibis 06:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 01:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]