User talk:Impy4ever

Welcome!

Hello, Impy4ever, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Hyacinth 08:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Summaries[edit]

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About definite and indefinite article.[edit]

Hi, thanks for your note. I have to mention, though, that I believe you're setting up a false argument based on an importance that isn't there.

We're talking about the mere rendering of titles in an alphabetical list. Convention (which, frankly, has gone to hell recently) dictates that a lead article (and, I must have been tired last night to use "preposition") be relegated to follow-up duty in favor of the noun, verb, adjective, etc., immediately following.

The reason, if memory serves, is simple: over the years, so many songs (and other titles) begin with "The" that to peruse a list of them would be a huge challenge. That's it; whether an article is definite or indefinite is really irrelevant.

Write with any comments. :) Radio Kirk talk to me 18:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I should note that I'm in agreement when it comes to preserving an artist's integrity, when demonstrable. To a lead article, however, I believe you ascribe importance via a generalization that could arguably dilute an individual's preferences when applied to the whole. Radio Kirk talk to me 20:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the excuse I have just made on the rock instrumentals' page, I decided to give you a brief answer right now. I appreciate your struggle in avoiding "sentimentalism" towards small passable things like the leading articles I appear so strongly attached to. Maybe my earlier post (while not a whole day has passed since then) is a little too long and that is because I wanted to justify my point of view by limpid arguments. Not knowing which one you would feel resonant with, I've written them all down.

I was a little thwarted when I've read your comment. Skipping the leading article just because it has a lot of instances in music is not a criterion for songs, but for bands' names. That is why I insisted so much about it last time. A leading definite article has been habitually added for a decade or two (in the rock'n'roll era); eventually, bands started dropping it and a procedure like the one you told me about was needed. I'll stress this once again: it is steered in behalf of band names and not songs. The leading article is a much more specific matter when it comes to songs' titles. It is in so strong a degree that I am still bothering you with it at ten to two a.m. And this ain't sentimentalism. I am only trying to be as correct and precise as you yourself do. Now I'm tired!

P.S. I still haven't understood one thing in your note. Did you happen to say you would tolerate my edits, but without agreeing with my point of view? Impy4ever 22:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my 40-plus years on this rock (grin), I saw it used for songs long before I saw it used for bands; again, because so many songs began with "The" or "A" that it was deemed convention to tail with the article for purposes of alphabetization (and this was long before electronic databases became the norm). And, yes, essentially, we'll agree to disagree; I did not ever intend to revert you (except to realphabetize "The Message"). Radio Kirk talk to me 23:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility[edit]

Could you please stop calling people "morons" in your edit summaries? Thanks. — Tobias Bergemann 12:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Electrecord logo.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Electrecord logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Horslips-01.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:Horslips-01.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 07:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giazotto[edit]

Hello! Now I haven't internet at home, so now I wasn't ready to answer on your question. Later I can to send you an information about the sources. But please, see the german version - thay wrote, that Staatsbibliothek in Dresden confirm, that they never had any composition of such type composed by Albinoni, and that Giazotto composed the Adagio completly by himself - so, any 6 first bars are original... I was confused, but it seems be true. What are you thinking about this?? Best regards, Gerea-en 19:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Despre Cum mi-am petrecut sfarsitul lumii[edit]

Fiind ca ai jucat un rol in filmul asta, crezi ca ai putea sa adaugi informatiile importante la articolul? It's not easy to find a lot of information about it, and you probably know more about it than anyone on wikipedia :) — [ ric | opiaterein ] — 01:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Innuendo andalusian.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Innuendo andalusian.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giazotto, Vitali etc.[edit]

Yes, you have reason. Also the hoax is Ave Maria by "Caccini", "Pieta Signore" by Stradella and a lot of other "Italian (and not only) Baroque" pieces. See here: [1] (but of course this list is not full). Best regards from Poland;-) Gerea-en 13:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andalusian cadence[edit]

I don't know too much about music theory, so I was wondering if you could answer a question since you did a lot of work on the Andalusian cadence article. I'm working on a song article where the song's in A minor and it uses a chord progression that goes A minor, G minor, F major, E major. Would this be considered an Andalusian cadence or variation thereof? 17Drew 03:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heinrich Hertz[edit]

Please consider re-visiting Talk:Heinrich Hertz#jewish ancestry. I'd be interested in your feedback about the suggested edit strategy I've proposed. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 16:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Lume alba.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lume alba.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 22:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Invocatie andalusian.ogg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Invocatie andalusian.ogg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010[edit]

Florin Stoian[edit]

A tag has been placed on Florin Stoian, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. macbookair3140 (talk) 23:18, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andalusian[edit]

I see you are still watching this page. Please therefore excuse my editing without notification. The article is perhaps the most scholarly of any wiki page on a chord progression but is therefore quite technical and, while your English is good, it can benefit from clarification in such a case. There is some material that is already covered elsewhere. Please note that a citation is required for statements concerning modality and advances in music theory - the sequence can be understood as conforming to the melodic minor scale.Thanks for your understanding and best wishes. Redheylin (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Galánta (Galanta) District[edit]

Template:Galánta (Galanta) District has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Coyne[edit]

Re your tags: I wonder could you possibly tag/ highlight the "weasel words"? And how many more than the current 11 references should we expect an article of this length to have? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain exactly what you see as the "problems with the article" on the Talk page for that artiucle? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template: Mureş County[edit]

Template: Mureş County has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.--Rokarudi--Rokarudi 13:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tributaries of Mureş River (Romanian and Hungarian names)[edit]

Template: Tributaries of Mureş River (Romanian and Hungarian names) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.--Rokarudi--Rokarudi 13:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Minnie lydian.ogg[edit]

This file is used in a different article rather than the said article. Will you change the rationale? --George Ho (talk) 20:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2008 contribution to the article on Vitali's Chaconne[edit]

Hello Impy4ever. On 2 November 2008 at 22:38 you included the statement that modulations only became "typical" with the advent of Romanticism. You write "change of key signature" but "modulation" must be what you mean, since "change of key signature" (or more exactly "clef signature") strictly speaking is simply a pragmatic musically immaterial choice as to how to write in a modulation, which can be written either like that or with the accidentals spelled out in the staff, whichever is more convenient in any individual case for the writer and/or the users of the score.

Now where on earth did you get that idea? Long before Romanticism, just to mention one important and well known counterexample to your statement, numerous musical forms had modulation (very often to their 5th for major keys or to their relative major for minor keys) in their very definition, let alone in their implementation in specific musical works. The number of modulations of the Chaconne (from g minor to e-flat minor and back) might be unusual for its period, but you certainly can't say that modulation, in and of itself, is "untypical" of music before Romanticism. I'll get rid of this inaccurate statement. Ok? Basemetal00 (talk) 20:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Royal Tenenbaums (soundtrack), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages French and Romanian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Impy4ever. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Impy4ever. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Impy4ever. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]