Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:46, 12 December 2021

Welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Hello, Sgvrfjs, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. My name is Howicus, and I've been an editor here for some time. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Misplaced Pages
• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

If you're working on creating a new article, this page has instructions on how to cite sources, complete with videos.

If all this Wikicode is a little overwhelming, WP:Cheatsheet may help untangle it.

If you're looking for a tutorial of sorts, The Misplaced Pages Adventure is a good option.

And if you need more help, I'd recommend getting live help at the Misplaced Pages help chat channel (click "connect" to join): #wikipedia-en-help . Additionally, you could ask me on my talk page, try the Teahouse (a help page for new users) or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, welcome, and have fun editing! Howicus (Did I mess up?) 01:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Wood Nymph (Sibelius) has been accepted

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Misplaced Pages. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Misplaced Pages!

Hi, Sgvrfjs

Thank you for your very kind message on my talk page. I am also interested in classical music.

I looked at your version of The Wood Nymph before anyone else edited it here and your work-in-progress on The Oceanides in your sandbox. As is, both are better than the average English Misplaced Pages article in writing quality and content. Misplaced Pages needs more editors like you.

However, you must understand that at its core Misplaced Pages is a wiki that is (ideally) written collaboratively. No one owns an article on Misplaced Pages, no matter how much work an individual put into it. No one can expect their work to remain as first written. Some edits will improve the article, some will make it worse, some are deliberate vandalism (usually infantile rather than malicious)—but usually articles tend to improve over time. Where editors disagree about something in an article, the consensus prevails. An edit is not the equivalent of a teacher, or professor, marking up your paper. Misplaced Pages's culture does not respect authority, academic degrees, or formal achievements.

English Misplaced Pages does not prefer any particular variety of the English language, although an article should consistently use the same variety. Misplaced Pages has a guideline on using and resolving disputes concerning varieties of English.

Misplaced Pages's style is loosely governed by its own Manual of Style. Some oddities in the Manual of Style reflect deliberate compromises between American English and British English where consistency is desirable. For example, article titles and section headings are capitalized according to sentence case (as in British English), but titles of English Language works use title case (as in American English). See Manual of Style § Composition titles). Some Wikipedians tend to be sticklers about matters of style; alas, I am one of those. You can avoid conflict over that by spending some time with the Manual of Style. Some Wikipedians tend to be contentions, which is a common problem in online communities; I try not to be one of those.

You do not need to work on an article in your sandbox until it is a masterpiece, and that also is not the way Misplaced Pages operates. I suggest that you feed content into The Oceanides and other articles gradually and do your editing directly in the article. In my experience, Misplaced Pages works best when editors make a lot of bite-size edits, with a descriptive edit summary, rather than in big chunks. But that is just my opinion.

Because of the quality of your work, you should aspire to have articles you care about promoted to Good Article and then to Featured Article. Politically, you improve your chance for promotion by editing collaboratively with others.—Finell 05:25, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for tone poems

Thank you for your note on my talk! Love all of it, + needed "haha" ;) - I was in no mood for decent writing yesterday, should have stayed off the keyboard, instead turned to the task of replacing "genre" by "type" in hymns and hit some tone poems because there titles could have been hymns ;) - The discussion began at Mass in C major (Beethoven) where I would not add a type because it is in the title. We should probably add "form" (Missa solemnis) but as the whole box is unwanted by some, I tread carefully. You are quite welcome to maintain the Sibelius info, - we have time until his anniversary, right? Today is the last day to improve BWV 185 because that is for tomorrow ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda for your happiness! :) I'll start the standardizations on the Sibelius. Is there a place to let people know that things have been standardized, so that if people make a change to one they'll understand that they have brought it out of step with all of its cousins? Also, why would the infoboxes be controversial? I love how they quickly and succinctly relay to the reader necessary information, without having to read through the opening introduction or the whole article. Also, what does "Template:Did you know nominations/The Oceanides" mean? I am not familiar with all the Wiki politics. The Oceanides was fun to write (although I probably wrote too much; stunning, really, that this tiny piece should have more written about it than his symphonies; but maybe the Wiki labor is indicative of love rather than importance), and I was motivated by the sobering (and UNFORTUNATE!) fact that this beautiful piece has been heard by so few. It's a real shame. But the silver lining: if every masterpiece by every composer was in the standard repertoire, then there would be no hidden gems for classical music fans like us to discover! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 17:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your love of this music, with infectious enthusiasm. "Why are infoboxes so controversial?" Don't ask me ;) - Did you see my user page? - Perhaps ask Opus33 who showed reluctance on the Beethoven mass. A small group including me just worked on Carl Nielsen, for the 150th anniversary. Looking forward to something similar for Sibelius, - and with more works covered! My part in Nielsen was mostly the works list, - see if you want to adopt the idea of a templated row entry for your list, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

So, I did a little editing this morning (instead of work!), and I have made a standardized format for all of the Sibelius tone poems with infoboxes that have pages. I also pasted a message on the talk pages of each infobox, as this was the only thought that came to mind about how to get everyone on the same page with the infobox (check them out :] ). Nice to hear you're working on the Nielsen pages, especially for the 150. The Sibelius 150 shouldn't be until December 8, so there is always time. I try to avoid the symphonies, Finlandia, and the violin concerto, since I'm sure there a lot of people there who are very passionate and particular! :) As for the templated row entry, I seriously considered it when overhauling the Sibelius list of works, but decided against it for two reasons: 1) the list is incomplete on most everything other than the orchestral; and, 2) I just like find it easier (in my personal opinion) to have the traditional Wiki format (since you lose your place and sorting on the template if you click on a link). But I'm sure someone will do it eventually, just not me! Haha. Is the sortable list of works considered superior or better or more complete? Please let me know if you have any other suggestions on the infoboxes (I sure hope someone doesn't come along and take them all down!). Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 19:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, for the infoboxes and your ideas! - One of the stranger concepts is that whoever writes an article has some initial say about style, - and some think an infobox is just style. I am not a missionary ;) - So I think people will think twice before removing yours, and if, discuss. - When the time comes you can suggest an infobox for one of the symphonies, actually No. 1 has a miniature one ;) - One of the Dvořák symphonies has one because I expanded that article, No. 8. - The sortable list for Nielsen came from lazy me looking at three lists in one, by genre, by FS # and by Op. #, - and if you had to change something you had to change it 3 times ... - The other is brandnew, nobody did such a thing before, but some like it, - it's sortable by genre, title, the 3 numbers, poet, key - as you like it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:07, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Precious

music by Sibelius
Thank you for quality contributions to articles on the music by Jean Sibelius, beginning with an addition to his list of works, adding detailed infoboxes, expanding stubs such The Oceanides, for compleating the list and for spirited talk, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1252 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Today: The Oceanides, "his second to last tone poem and is widely considered to be one of his most underappreciated (and underplayed) masterpieces." - thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Five years ago now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Main Sibelius article

Hi Sgvrfjs. I have been impressed by your recent work on Sibelius, esepcially The Oceanides and The Wood Nymph. You have an appealing style and present all the essential facts in your articles. You may have noticed that we have started work on an expansion of the main Jean Sibelius article which I think needs to be improved to at least GA status, possibly even FA, in time for his 150th anniversary on 8 December. While your efforts on his individual compositions and the list of works are very useful as sources in this connection, I wonder whether I could persuade you to collaborate in further work on the main article . We still have a few months left but I would like to avoid the last minute rush we had with Carl Nielsen which we just managed to complete in time. If you don't yet feel like editing the article itself, any advice you may have would be greatly appreciated.

On the list of works, there is a detailed comprehensive list in Andrew Barnett's Sibelius (2007) which runs to no less than 44 pages! We had ambitions on providing a comprehensive list for Nielsen but to do so for Sibelius would require enormous effort. As he wrote so many songs and choral compositions, perhaps a separate list could be devoted to these. As for "sortable" lists, I must say that I am rather old-fashioned and find the type of list you have been working on easier to absorb than fully sortable lists like the one Gerda Arendt created for Nielsen, but I am probably in the minority.

I see you have also been encouraging standardized info boxes for Sibelius's compositions. While I seldom include info boxes in my articles on music and art, I have nothing against them (unlike some other Wikipedians) and think you have made a sound proposal. Nevertheless, as you must know, anyone can edit Misplaced Pages, so don't be disappointed if people come along and make changes.

If you think there's anything I can help you with, just let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 10:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

It's so very kind of you to write, Ipigott. :) First of all, thank you for noticing (and approving of) my expansion to The Wood Nymph and The Oceanides. These are, as you may have guessed, personal favorites of mine, and I have sought to remedy what I see as their relative neglect. I was, to be quite honest, not aware of an ongoing, all-hands-on-deck project to improve the Sibelius pages for the 150 (I kind of exist in a Misplaced Pages bubble), but am glad to hear of the enterprise. In general, I have avoided what I consider to be the most important Sibelius pages (i.e., his main page and the symphonies and violin concerto), because I fear editing wars and conflict, and as an inexperienced editor without any formal training in music, I see it was my responsibility to stay out of the way of the professionals. :) I'm a PhD student in the USA (in political science), and so my Misplaced Pages edits are a side hobby mainly.

But, while I'm not sure I can help too much (especially in July and August) on major edits, I am more than happy to be kept in the loop and sent little requests by the Sibelius editing power team that be. We are in agreement about the old-fashioned lists rather than the sortable one (the latter is just SO HARD to read...). Talking with the lovely Gerda Arendt, it seems she opted for the sortable list on Nielsen because she tired of editing a chronological and opus lists in tandem. With Sibelius, and his absolutely meaningless opus numbers, we really have no need for the latter. True, the existing list is not technically chronological either, being divided into sections, but if this approach is good enough for Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Mendelssohn, and Brahms, then I think it's good enough for Sibelius, too. That said, I think I erred in not placing the Op. number in bold at the front, a nice touch to be found on the Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky, and Brahms pages. I too am familiar with the Barnett (2007) list and had been writing out the songs in my sandbox, but tired of the task, especially since I do not actually know this music. As for the main page, I agree that it needs some work, in that it seems to be not at the same level as the main pages for other illustrious composers. I would, of course, be interested in hearing any ideas for improvement you all might have, hopefully starting with a tighter opening (of course, I am predisposed to the first paragraph intro I wrote on the list of compositions page...haha). It has also always seemed odd to me to list violinist before composer. Tell you what, I need to read through the main article again before I can comment meaningfully on it; I can be in touch with suggestions.

Anyway, it's so nice to establish contact. My apologies for burning all of my fuel on obscure tone poem pages that probably no one clicks on or reads, rather than the main page or the symphonies, but at least we now have the most complete articles on these two pieces on the internet! Thanks for the compliments on my style and thoroughness; compliments like these keep editors like me running :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, one more thing. I added (finally!) the remaining content I had on The Oceanides: I had left the composition section incomplete due to other commitments. I added it today. I noticed that you and a couple of other editors were going through and fixing my mistakes (I guess programme should be program and ." should be ".). Thanks! And sorry for my errors. (also, is it Sibelius' or Sibelius's???). As for whether he received $1200 in total or $1200 on top of the first $1000, obviously I read it as the latter in Tawaststjerna 1986, p. 246. But that the same thing you cited! So, hmmm...I changed it for now to "as compensation, Sibelius would receive $1,200, as well as an honorary doctorate of music from Yale University" which seems to be a suitably vague enough to encompass both positions until we work out the truth. :) Thoughts? Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 18:39, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for including me, all good plans and ideas! As for the Oceanides, they will not stay in the obscure but appear in the limelight of the Main page soon, in the "Did you know?" section (DYK), actually tomorrow, second half of the day ;) - I don't expect record numbers of viewers (5.000 and up are recorded) but a few hundred, - and sometimes (not to often) readers have ideas for improvement, - enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:49, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Awesome! I made a last couple of ." to ". and ," to ", edits that others had missed, so the whole article should be following the same rule as of now. Hopefully this means the piece is ready to go for tomorrow. Fingers crossed, and thanks Gerda Arendt for making this happen. :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 19:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

(Just Gerda is fine ;) ) - My pleasure! Doesn't happen often to come across an article with GA qualities from the start, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Do you think we can nominate The Oceanides and the Wood Nymph for GA status? I think they're both ready at last! And, what do they need to become FA? Sgvrfjs (talk) 00:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I think you can. It doesn't take more than copying a little string to the very top of the article talk. You find it in the instructions, "subtopic=Music". Do one at a time because there may be questions and answers which you can apply to the other before even nominating. I suggest the Nymphes, because once GA, that could also be nominated for the Main page. (It was too late for DYK which has to happen a week after creation or expansion.) If you want to read GA reviews beforehand, go to the talk of any article with a little green icon in the upper right, - a link to the discussion will be on the talk page. (Some green is on my user page, the top one still needs a review to be started.) - FA to follow ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks, Sgvrfjs, for your detailed explanations and offer of support. You certainly don't need professional qualifications in music to be able to write good Misplaced Pages articles on the subject. The ones you have already put together are ample proof. I am no Sibelius expert either, although I enjoy his music. The reason I have taken a recent interest in him is that cultural coverage of the Nordic countries is rather weak on Misplaced Pages and I thought such a well-known international figure deserved far better coverage for his 150th anniversary. I welcome you initial ideas on improvement, including those on the Sibelius talk page. As for bringing The Oceanides and the Wood Nymph up to GA, I think you should go for it. Rather than nominating immediately, I think you might benefit by calling on other experts on music such as Tim riley whose advice was extemely useful in connection with Nielsen. On The Oceanides, did you know the piece was included in the NY Phil's concert on February 26-28? Perhaps you can find some reviews. The Wood Nymph will be included in the Lahti Symphony Orchestra's concert on September 1. We should keep in touch.--Ipigott (talk) 07:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you nominate the nymphs and ask Tim to do the review ;) - sample pictured, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for The Oceanides

On 13 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Oceanides, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in his tone poem The Oceanides, Finnish composer Jean Sibelius "applied the impressionist method of scoring to the bass instruments, thereby achieving effects of sonority hitherto unknown"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Oceanides. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations on your first DYK and for promoting information about Sibelius during his anniversary year.--Ipigott (talk) 13:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I support that! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! What a great day! Thanks for all of your help; it's a team accomplishment. :D Okay, I need to take a break and go to work :/ Sgvrfjs (talk) 16:21, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Today is the next great day: for GA (good article and my initials) you follow the link WP:GA (hint: whenever you don't know a Misplaced Pages abbreviation you look for a construction with "WP:" in front) and read what you think you may need. I can tell you that the most important information is another link in the top line saying "Instructions". In there, the step to prepare the article is described. I think the article is ready but you know it more intimately, please check. You will not be punished for missing a point, I have not experienced a single review which was not a pleasant exchange of ideas, even the one that failed. - When that step is done, follow the next step to nominate. If you have questions on the way fell free to ask ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Hi Gerda! I made the nomination thanks to your help. Now, how do I request Tim's help? :) Also, one question, why are DYK considered important? PS: Thanks for letting me make the GA nomination. I have read so much about the topic, and I think it's ready. Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK articles are checked for criteria by a reviewer, and the exposure on the Main page attracts readers for your topic who don't normally search for it. The statistics for yesterday are not out yet, but the day before show 130, just for being lined up for DYK. - Go to Tim riley, image on his user page but I don't want to ping him again, here, and see if you want to chime in. (Another hint: before adding a new topic to someone's talk, look around, for the mood of the recipient and if a thread is perhaps already started.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks, Gerda, for your time. Once again, you look out for me and already contacted Tim. I really appreciate it; seems like you have it covered (even played a song of woe about my discouragement, haha), so I won't make any changes. I don't really know what to expect, but I'm sure a lot of work will be needed to bring it up to GA status. I was just reading through the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style, and noticed that I probably could be accused of editorializing and using unnecessary/discouraged language. Maybe I should have learned these things first, before writing articles. Oh well, both you and Ipigott read it through and seemed to think it was good enough to try. Thanks for the explanation on DYK; 130 just from the queue! Wow :) ...it will be fun to see the hits from yesterday once they come out of the oven. Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Some days there are no hits, for some days they come later, - whatever: these figures should not be overestimated. My prediction would be 1k, - classical music is not the greatest hit, you better mention Hitler or sex to get in the higher regions ;) - starting 5k gets your article to the statistics. I personally don't care, - it's enough for me to know that a few readers will look who otherwise never meet the article. - Did you know that I made a DYK about encouragement ("Hook" on the talk, look up in times of need)? (also not my article) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Haha :) I have no comments! Thanks for fixing the GA post with Top means Top...sorry :/ Okay, I'm signing off. Happy editing. :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

See? Bot working nicely, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

See stats: 1032, - I am impressed by my estimate ;) - There will be extras for the time early today, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the update! I, too, am impressed by your precognition. :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Hi, Gerda! Lovely day, and hope your edits go well. :) I guess we haven't heard from Tim about the Oceanides GA? Sgvrfjs (talk) 04:36, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Edits go well, every day a singer on DYK, did you know, all because of this ;) - Read Tim's page, he was on vacation, had a difficult GA review (finished) and plans a FA on a composer, - that translates to "nusy" for me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:30, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Oceanides

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Oceanides you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 21:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Apologies for the frightful English the bot perpetrates in my name. I have left some comments on the review page that you may like to consider. Tim riley talk 17:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Oceanides

The article The Oceanides you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Oceanides for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 20:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Good! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt, Tim riley, and Ipigott: - Ya-hooo! Thanks to everyone for their patience, edits, and assistance. The Oceanides is a marvelous piece truly deserving of the attention we gave it. A great example of team work! And now, for The Wood Nymph to eventually make GA! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

with you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations on your first GA. I'm sure there will be many more to come. I had not noticed the article was being reviewed and see that everything had been completed before I looked in. Well done!--Ipigott (talk) 06:43, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

You might like to replace the rather noisy photo of Sibelius on this and other articles with File:Jean sibelius-2.jpg which is also on the main Sibelius page.--Ipigott (talk) 06:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

FAC for The Oceanides

@Gerda Arendt, Tim riley, and Ipigott:. So how does one go about getting The Oceanides placed as an FA nominee? I should think that it's quite close to being at that level, since I have now executed Tim's recommendation that interesting but non-essential content be footnoted; I have copied his notation and citation practices from Ravel. Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 20:51, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

You go to Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates (WP:FAC) and follow the instructions. Perhaps before you do, read the nomination for his Eighth, and prepare some invitation like there for reviewers. I would mention that it's your first FAC. When nominated, also list at WP:QAIPOST, please. You will need at least five supports and no oppose for the delegates to consider promotion. Good luck. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

That's good advice from Gerda. I certainly think you should go ahead. I know several of us would support FA. Good luck.--Ipigott (talk) 21:52, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, all. I have made the nomination; hope I did it correctly! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 23:16, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

You did well, but not enough. Differently from GA, you have to do three more steps. YOU initialize the nomination by writing something kind and interesting to lure reviewers - compare the Eighth. THEN you have to copy the title of that FAC to the general FAC page, which all people interested in FAs watch, as you insert a DYK nomination in the nom page. More good luck! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:50, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, but I don't understand: I did all of those things. On my computer, the FAC page has the title The Oceanides and the invitation I wrote last night posted. But, the link on The Oceanides talk page is still red that says initiate the nomination. I followed the four steps. Sgvrfjs (talk) 13:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. You did well, - I only saw the red link, but now checked that it goes to the correct nomination. A mystery to me, calling an expert. If that doesn't help talk to the FAC page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:54, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Any luck? I really appreciate your help. Sgvrfjs (talk) 15:56, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I thought you would ask, - I did it now. I have no time yet for a review myself, but there's no rush. Have a wake-up call on the Main page, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Tidying up Jean Sibelius

Hi Sgvrfjs. I wonder if you could spare some of your valuable time to help out with tidying up the Jean Sibelius article in the next few days in the hope we can work it up to GA in time for a DYK on 8 December. I'm afraid my own progress on the article has been rather slow but I have now at least completed the section on the history of his life. There are however a few paragraphs in the article which are still unreferenced, particularly towards the end. Unfortunately I am now in Luxembourg and do not have access to all the library books on Sibelius I can find in Denmark. If I remember correctly, you have nearly all relevant works at home. Perhaps you could look through the article and provide missing citations if you can find them without too much trouble. If not, the passages will probably have to be deleted. Any suggestions you may have for further work on the article would be appreciated. I see you are making good progress on En Saga.--Ipigott (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Ipigott:! First of all, thank you so very much for your labors on the Jean Sibelius main page: while all editors perform useful tasks, I really appreciate someone who is driven to create and expand original content. My exams went well, and so of course I find myself back on Misplaced Pages to write the article I always thought I would tackle first: En saga (I guess somehow The Wood Nymph and The Oceanides jumped the queue). Anyway, I'm making good progress, as you can see. As for your kind request to provide citations, unfortunately I TOO find myself away from my books, as I have traveled for Thanksgiving. All I have with me are my notes on En saga. I'll let you know if and when I can assist. Sgvrfjs (talk) 15:50, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me on this. If you manage to contribute to the Sibelius article in time, it would be much appreciated. I am expecting to receive some feedback from Tim Riley which will no doubt reveal other weaknesses. I have been following your work on En saga and it is indeed coming along very well. Enjoy your Thanksgiving.--Ipigott (talk) 08:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Ipigott:! Will do. It occured to me that there are two things I don't know how to do that you might be able to help on. Both seem rather painless for the well-trained Wikipedian (not me). First, the Template: List of Orchestral Works by Jean Sibelius needs to be renamed Template: Jean Sibelius. Second, the page En Saga needs to be renamed En saga, so as to maintain consistency. Thoughts? Sgvrfjs (talk) 16:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The title of the template is in fact Jean Sibelius while its name is "Works for Orchestra by Jean Sibelius". The List of compositions by Jean Sibelius is a normal article. Do you want the template to be called Template:Jean Sibelius because you want to include additional items over and above the orchestral compositions? I can't move En Saga to En saga as there is a redirect with that title but I have asked an administrator to handle it.--Ipigott (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Ipigott:! Thanks! Seems the editor has changed En Saga to the appropriate En saga; however, doing so upset/broke the page links to the old capitalized version. I have gone through a number of pages (Jean Sibelius, The Oceanides, Template:Works for Orchestra by Jean Sibelius, List of compositions by Jean Sibelius) to reestablish the key links. I have also checked the pages of all compositions on the list of compositions page, only one of which (The Wood Nymph) has a reference to En saga, it was already in the lowercased form. I'm glad we finally got this fixed to the appropriate lowercased version. As for the template, another editor a while ago thought it should just be called Template: Jean Sibelius, and he attempted to make the change, but I don't believe it was completely successful: it only changed the title of the box, not the corresponding template page name. He seemed to think that it should be just Jean Sibelius so that it can accommodate eventually more than just the orchestral works and so that he could add a related articles section, which I later added to. After looking at templates for other composers (all of which are by names) I agreed. But I find the difference in names between the box and the page sloppy, and yet I don't know how to fix it. See: Template talk:Works for Orchestra by Jean Sibelius. Also, is it just me or is a collapsed table super annoying and counterproductive in that it adds an extra click! I wish it'd go back to non-collapsable. Sigh. Thanks for your help! Sgvrfjs (talk) 03:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Ipigott:! What does it mean for my En saga sandbox page to have been "patrolled"? Does this mean I am doing something against Misplaced Pages policy? Just curious. Sgvrfjs (talk) 15:50, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sgvrfjs: think it has something to do with your being able to move your user page draft into the main space. It's not that anyone is stalking you. Depending on the "status" of contributors, the pages created require patrolling. But please don't worry about it. As you are not creating a new article, you can just add your ongoing work to the existing page.--Ipigott (talk) 16:05, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Also, what do you think about The Oceanides making FA? And The Wood Nymph making GA? Is this something desirable to work towards? Thanks for the guidance. Sgvrfjs (talk) 03:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I have removed the infobox as their is currently a discussion about it going on on the talk page. I would agree, however, that the new image is a lot better than the old one. Cassianto 09:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

OK Sgvrfjs. On En saga vs En Saga, I let the lower-case version run for a while alone so I could pick up all the remaining upper-case occurrences and correct them. With your help too, I think they have now all been covered. It is however true that the En Saga form is quite often used in English publications, concert programmes, etc. For this reason, I have added a redirect from En Saga. So there should not be any problems in future. I've moved the template as requested and agree with the logic. On The Oceanides, I think there is great potential for FA, ditto The Wood Nymph for GA or even FA. I would nevertheless like to firm up the main Jean Sibelius article in time for a GA within the next week to 10 days in order to have it displayed as a DYK on 8 December. If it runs into problems before the end of next week, then we could try to take The Wood Nymph to GA so that there is at least something on the main page for 8 December. I'll now get back to expanding the music section on the basis of Tim's remarks (see my talk page).--Ipigott (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Imho, it doesn't hurt at all to nominate both Oceanides and Wood Nymph for FA/GA right now. Remember Nielsen. Wood Nymph for a DYK on the birthday. If Sinatra can have 16 hooks one day, Sibelius can have two. (I did one on Kafka's birthday, remember?) - Loved your version of the composer, Sgvrfjs (see top of my user page.) The symphonies could all look a little more like the first, no? Can the tag go? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: The only reason I expressed hesitation was that I hoped Sgvrfjs could help out with the main biography as a priority. I think we should do what we can to get that article up to GA in time. But given the excellent quality of both The Oceanides and The Wood Nymph, perhaps those could indeed be nominated now as you suggest. It would be great if The Oceanides could reach FA in time for the 8th but it might already be too late.--Ipigott (talk) 08:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I said nominate and meant nominate ;) - I think no work is needed, so no loss for the bio. If a reviewer thinks work is needed, that's fine, and can be done or not THEN. No need for a FA, the Eighth is already scheduled. I don't think the readers care much about little star. I think they might like an infobox, but who cares about the readers when it comes to that topic ;) - Did you know that the Bruckner symphonies had an infobox in 2007? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda, for keeping us informed about Symphony No. 8 (Sibelius). It's a good article and will probably attract wide interest.--Ipigott (talk) 21:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Accessibility

I went over the tone poems, trying to install accessibility features for which I don't get punished. One is {{lang}}, indicating the language of text other than English, useful for people using screenreaders. Another is {{start date}}, which elegantly translates to other languages. I used European date format for the European topic, hope that was right? - Some of his compositions seem to be unreferenced. - The template has red links, - I hope the navbox-purists don't see that ;) - I am not happy with the list of his works having the original title first, but our articles English, - but then that was the same for Kafka. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I wonder why many articles have {{Works for Orchestra by Jean Sibelius}} while it could be simply {{Jean Sibelius}}? I suggest to have it collapsed, at least in short articles, as for example Voces intimae. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for you message Gerda. I can address a few of your points. 1) The reason the navbox has a number of red links is because, when I made it last year, I thought it advisable to include 'links-in-waiting' in the navbox for important articles that, while not currently having a page, should nonetheless get one eventually. I was not then, and am not now, familiar will all of the Misplaced Pages customs, and so I had no idea that the navbox purists would frown upon the red links. Do you think they should be removed? I'd also like to hear Ipigott (talk · contribs)'s thoughts on this matter. 2) The navbox was originally named {{Works for Orchestra by Jean Sibelius}}, and was recently changed to {{Jean Sibelius}}, per the help of Ipigott and one other user. Because the navbox still appeared on the pages, I didn't think I needed to go in to each page and change the code from the former to the latter, but I am happy to do so if you think this is cleaner/more professional. 3) I really don't like seeing the navbox collapsed, because I think it defeats it purpose. On short, articles, perhaps. But I prefer the autocollapse feature, so that it's there until the page becomes crowded with other navboxes. 4) I am unfamiliar with accessibility features and don't really understand what you did. Is this something you are planning to do systematically across the Sibelius compositions articles? Perhaps you can explain it to me. 5) In the Oceanides GA edits we settled on American style dates, rather than European, because the piece premiered in the US. I, however, think it'd be better if, at least in the Sibelius articles, we picked one and stuck to it (like selecting Sibelius' over Sibelius's or tone poem over symphonic poem). If you and Ipigott and others think European dates are the best route, then no problem. Just let me KNOW, so that I can fix the 2 tone poem articles I have written and not make the same mistake in my on-going En saga expansion. Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 01:22, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

• The red links in the navbox should be created, not removed ;) (If some are left in the end, the purists can remove them.)
• I would stick to all-European dates for Sibelius, a European composer, and all his works, for consistency, but am not passionate about it. I think to have American dates for a piece just because it happens to have been premiered in the US is a bit arbitrary, - as if where it was premiered was more important than where is was composed.
• {{lang}}: please click and read, - in short: for people who can's see but have our articles read to them by "screenreaders", the template tells the device "from here to end bracket, the language is not English but Swedish" (or Finnish, or French ...), so that the device doesn't try to apply English pronunciation to the Swedish (or or) names. I don't know what it actually does then, but you can ask Graham87 who is blind. It's a good idea to apply it to all non-English terms in all articles!

Just for fun: I have a composition on the Main page today, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

There are quite a few issues here. First of all, thank you Gerda for your contributions and your continuing interest in Sibelius. While your edits are not immediately obvious in the articles as normally displayed, they no doubt enhance general "accessibility" as you call it while contributing to your understandable German preference for Ordnung muss sein (note the markup). As for consistency in dates, we may be fighting a losing battle. In general, the creator of an article usually decides on the date structure. Some even specify their preference at the top of the edit version. In practice, we all usually try to maintain the established approach on the articles we edit. I don't know to what extent consistency in the dates of articles on other composers has been achieved. Nor am I certain we need to work in that direction. As with boxes, I am not really bothered about it as long as there is consistency within each individual article. If I remember correctly, Sgvrfjs has already been through one set of date changes on one of the tone poems. It seems to me to be rather a waste of time moving backwards and forwards. If another American editor creates articles on S's other pieces, we may well be faced with the same problem again. You are absolutely right in pointing out that many of the articles on S's compositions are unreferenced. There is indeed a tremendous amount of work to be done on nearly all of them. The problem no doubt dates back to the time when Misplaced Pages articles (like those in most other encyclopaedias) simply provided a list of the sources consulted without any in-line referencing. I know from my own experience how difficult it is to add in-line references to such articles at a later date. It is far more difficult than rewriting them from scratch and that's probably why people have not been keen to work on them. In regard to the red links in the navbox, I am not against them. The pieces in question obviously need to be included, whether red linked or black linked. The red links may be preferable as they encourage the writing of new articles. Autocollapse is fine. As for the list of compositions, Sgvrfjs is to be congratulated on his diligence. I am perfectly happy to see the original title first. A choice obviously needed to be made as even in English-language publications the original Swedish or Finnish titles of a significant number of works are those most commonly used. Let's keep it the way it is -- in the interests of consistency. I think this also answers most of the queries from Sgvrfjs. As a footnote to this discussion on accessibility and consistency, while I welcome some of the recent updates to the Wikidata entry on Jean Sibelius, I must say I am surprised that none of his symphonies are mentioned under "notable works" while at the very top of the data items we read "instrument: violin". Even Yehudi Menuhin does not qualify for inclusion in this category although he is listed as a composer (but, like Sibelius, not as a "virtuoso" or "instrumentalist"! Maybe Gerda can help to sort this out.--Ipigott (talk) 09:58, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughts. It was not me who called it accessibilty, - making our articles useful for readers with different needs. There was even a discussion to have it as the sixths pillar. - We agree (and let's just talk about Sibelius-related articles) that ...

... red links in the navbox are no problem

... two different names for the same navbox are no problem

... autocollapsed for the navbox is fine, but can be changed in a short article

... original titles first in the list of compositions are preferable

... original titles should appear also in the composition article, and have a redirect

... English titles as article names are no problem

... American dates in articles are no problem (but I still prefer European composition dates in the infoboxes)

... noref-tag: adding at least one inline ref and removing tag is wanted

Everybody can edit Wikidata. Normally the data are fed by an infobox ;) - I have other priorities, would like to expand Voces intimae for a DYK, - help welcome ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Everybody has permission to edit Wikidata, perhaps, but I am just not up to it and cannot spend hours or days on finding out how it works. Anyway, thanks Gerda for your summary and good luck with Voces intimae. I wonder how the language tag for Latin will have this read out for the blind: high-church Latin pronunciation (Woe keys in team eye) or the Italianate approach (Vochis in tea may)? Perhaps neither!--Ipigott (talk) 11:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

The language tags let the screen reader user have the text read out to them in the specified language if a speech synthesizer if that language is installed on their system. I personally have this feature turned off (but I have some very eccentric settings on my screen reader), but other blind people find it very important. Graham87 12:44, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Continued from higher up: Template:Did you know nominations/Voces intimae (Sibelius), and I think the quartet deserves a place in the bio. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Sibelius categories

Hi, Gerda Arendt and Ipigott. I just wanted to raise a second minor clerical issue that I have noticed. The Category:Symphonic poems by Jean Sibelius page includes Kullervo, which various sources have classified as a choral symphony (which Misplaced Pages chooses as its preferred designation), a cantata, or a suite of tone poems. I myself have listed Kullervo in the List of compositions by Jean Sibelius under the subsection Chorus and Orchestra, while providing a small text page up under Symphonies, to reflect the fact that some sources consider Kullervo to be a Sibelius symphony. Here's the issue, I think in the interest of consistency, Kullervo should be removed from the category page of tone poems, because often it is not presented as such (contrast this to Lemminkäinen) and, potentially, added to Category:Symphonies by Jean Sibelius. A third option would be to allow Lemminkäinen and (possibly) Kullervo to both be in the symphonic poem category and the symphony category. I should add of course, that the exact number of tone poems by Sibelius depends on the source, but 13 are indisputable (1. En saga; 2. Spring Song; 3. The Wood Nymph; 4. Lemmkäinen (actually 4 in all); 5. Finlandia; 6. Pohjola's Daughter; 7. Pan and Echo; 8. The Dryad; 9. Nightride and Sunrise; 10. The Bard; 11. Luonnotar; 12. The Oceanides; and, 13. Tapiola.). Sometimes you also see inclusion of Dance Intermezzo and In Memoriam, and maybe Cassazione, but I chose a long time ago to place these works under Other Orchestra on the list of compositions page. Thoughts? Sgvrfjs (talk) 01:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

As you are especially interested in the tone poems, I concur with your analysis. Please go ahead with the changes you suggest.--Ipigott (talk) 07:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

I think a piece can be in more than category, see Lobgesang, for the longest time regarded as Mendelsohn's 2nd symphony. In the list,you managed well to make the interrelations visible. I would prefer if that was not small font, though.

Sibelius questions

As they come, looking closer at his works:

• I began Oma maa, planned English, but there are many different translations around, from a simple "My Land" to "Our Native Land" - German would probably be "Meine Heimat" but there's no good English word for Heimat, right? Also: the red link was Finnish.

The preferred English name seems to be "Our Native Land" but it would be more correctly translated as "My Native Land". The English actually translate Heimat as "mother country" whereas the Americans increasingly use "homeland". Take your pick!--Ipigott (talk) 08:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

See also this account which calls it "My Own Land" and provides quite a bit of background information.--Ipigott (talk) 08:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, will include (the ref is already in place, commented out, I only need to add link and title, was too tired yesterday). "Own land" is a try to render "Heimat", and is mentioned in the article, but "own" is such an ambiguous term, bringing ownership to mind. "Native land" is a different try, - I would say home country, and "maa" looks more like "my" than "our" to me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

• I wonder if we should have the translation linked in the navbox, - I suggest to link only the name and have the translation unlinked in brackets.
• For Voces, one source has a Berlin premiere in Berlin, in January 1910, vs. the one more frequently mentioned in April in Helsinki. Any other info about that? Perhaps played in Berlin but not public? Any source for the translation "Inner Voices", a header on the Sibelius site which makes a lot of sense to me?
• How about showing Sibelius at an age close to a composition, as for the Bruckner symphonies?
• How about (short) infoboxes for the symphonies?

I plan to fill more red links, then add to those new articles, then source the older ones, - let's see how far we get. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

• Snöfrid (Sibelius): is the text Swedish (as by the author) or Finnish, as the score claims? - Relation to the Wood nymph? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Update: no more redlinks in the navbox.

• I decided for In Memoriam (vs. In memoriam), per the Sibelius site
• The Dryad / Dryaden / Dryadi ?
• King Christian II Suite - but there's also incidental
• Tulen synty (vs. Tulen Synty)

Two hooks in prep for DYK on 8 Dec, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Well done, indeed, Gerda! Thanks for filling in the navbox red links. Sorry, I cannot help out more, but I see my long-term role as expanding stubs, not creating them. As for your questions above, I also have never been able to find out definitively which language Snöfrid is, but my guess is Swedish since the story comes from Swedish poet Viktor Rydberg. As for the others, in Swedish and I think Finnish too, it's common practice to keep the second word lowercase; hence, Tulen synty (The Origin of Fire), not Tulen Synty (The Origin of Fire), so En saga (A Saga, A Fairy Tale, or A Legend), not En Saga. I have always seen Dryadi as the Finnish for The Dryad, and don't know about the Swedish Dryaden. Where have you seen this? The Dryad is from 1909, I think, right before the Fourth Symphony, and it seems to me like he had by then transitioned away from the Swedish titles (En saga, Skogsrået, Vårsång) of his youth towards Finnish ones, considering the politics of the times and his status as a national authority. Oh and look at this infobox in all its wonderous glory! https://es.wikipedia.org/Jean_Sibelius :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 23:26, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy birthday!

Jean Sibelius
{{Jean Sibelius}}

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to a virtual editathon on Women in Music

Women in Music
	10 to 31 January 2016 Please join us in the worldwide virtual edit-a-thon hosted by Women in Red.

--Ipigott (talk) 16:27, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

nontrivial addition to lede in oceanides

Revert if dislike. Cheers. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 16:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

• I'm sorta waiting to see if my additions are OK with you. BTW, Ginette Neveu and Sibelius' Violin Concerto... "I'm speechless" is about all I can say. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
  • So sorry for the delay, but I've been busy with the start of the new semester. I'm so glad you enjoyed listening to the Sibelius Violin Concerto, one of his greatest works (although I have never heard the Neveu interpretation; I'll have to Spotify it!); not sure if you're new to Sibelius, but I really recommend (other The Oceanides, of course!) Pohjola's Daughter, En saga, Symphony No. 5, No. 7, and No. 2. Honestly, all the symphonies are masterful (although No. 6 is one I still haven't fallen head over heals for). As for the lede changes you made to The Oceanides, I like what I see; I completely agree with you that the lede should, in retrospect, have something about the impressionist interpretations. The reason I have originally left it out was because I believed there was no consensus among scholars and because Sibelius himself would certainly not have described his work using such a term (I read this somewhere; I should try to find that quote, as it would be good in the article). I may find myself tinkering eventually in a few minor spots, but overall, I really thank you for strengthening the article. Hopefully, you'll eventually find your way to supporting FA. As for your previous question on progressive tonality and Sibelius' style, it is very difficult to classify him for two reasons: 1) his style evolved overtime, and it seems as though scholars mark three periods: romantic (starts with Kullervo and ends with, probably, the Violin Concerto); continues into a a mix of classicism (Symphony No. 3) and 'expressionism' (Symphony No. 4); before turning to a neo-classicism (Symphony No. 5, No. 6, No. 7); and 2) because his style/idiom is so unique, so idiosyncratic, that it really defies classification. I certainly think of Sibelius as a 'modernist' (and certainly he was hailed by contemporary accounts as one), but today (well, since maybe the 1950s) he has been branded as kind of conservative, since he never abandoned tonality (such as Schoenberg and Stravinsky, arch-modernists who went atonal) or the importance of melody (such as Debussy and the other impressionists); his style is perhaps best described as 'organic', whatever that really means. His tonality is progressive in that he sought out new chords and combinations of notes (esp. Symphony No. 4, but the other later ones, too) but never jumped into the chasm that is atonality. As for Impressionism and The Oceanides, it's true that the piece is very unique sounding relative to the other works in his oeuvre, but certainly other compositions of his have also been described as Impressionist (e.g., The Swan of Tuolena, written in 1893-1895, well before the impressionist movement!!!). In writing the article, I chose to portray the debate but avoid touching on who is right (i.e., is The Oceanides different from his other works or not), since I am not trained in music and wanted to avoid editorializing. Hope this all is informative and helps! Thanks again for your help. Sgvrfjs (talk) 04:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
• I gave it Conditional Support contingent on references check. May be too busy to do anything soon. Would like to help with other Sibelius articles in the future. later! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 04:46, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
  • The paintings in The Oceanides are aesthetic additions that are kinda optional in the first place, and can either be swapped out for ones that have full provenance etc., or in the worst case scenario simply removed. They are not a major problem; merely an inconvenience. Those three photos of the Stoeckels and The Music Shed are, in my opinion, another matter entirely. They add significant visual content to the article, IMO. I have searched for a while and turned up no info about them. I'm afraid that if you want to keep them, you may have to email your contact again and ask three questions: were they published anywhere before 1923, and if not, who took the photos and when did that person/persons pass away. I am a little afraid these questions will annoy your contact, but... maybe not. Maybe it's worth a try. It's your call. OK, wait... I've got provenance for PD on a postcard of the exterior of the Music shed. Will run that by Nikkimaria. Do you want to keep the photo of the Stoeckels and the interior of the shed? If so, then you still need to try emailing... Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 14:02, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
    • Gosh, Lingzhi. You really have come through on The Oceanides with flying colors. I will reach out to the email contact at the Norfolk Festival soon and see if she can find any information. It's too bad that we have lost so many good images, but at least we still have Stenhammar, Debussy, and Parker. I wish we could hold on to the Gallen-Kallela Aallotaret painting, since he is a Finnish artist who Sibelius was friends with. Any way we can get that one back? As for the other random paintings, I was pretty sure I was going to have to drop them anyway, because Gerda advised me that the images needed to connect to the article better. Sorry also that my energy for the FAC has flagged; I guess I just enjoy creating content (at a near-FAC level, I hope) more than I enjoy thinking about copyright issues! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 23:24, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
      • I will try to rescue the Gallen-Kallela (BTW, some books refer to the painting as Aallottaria), but I know practically zero about licensing. I am learning as I go. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
        • I admit that it's kind of disappointing to lose all these images that I have grown to like a lot. Moreover, I think it speaks to a larger point: why are there so many images on Wikicommons that are not appropriate for editors to use? If it's a copyright issue, why does FAC matter; a violation is a violation, stub, good article, featured article, etc. notwithstanding. I am at work on my Madetoja expansion and I have carefully selected the images that I think enhance the article (even worked to get some loaded up through a helper named Revent, but gosh, what if they don't survive? Is the solution not to go for FAC nominations? Thanks again for your help! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
          • I suppose the solution is to learn about licensing, or find someone who already has. I think the Moran is very appropriate, but I never liked the Bouguereau (too much nymph and not enough water) or the Poynter (because it has a ship and a cave, neither of which seems appropriate in context). As for Gallen-Kallela, I did find a quote in a book which explicitly links it to Sibelius, FWIW. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
            • I agree with you; it's hard to find pictures for a non-bio, in my opinion. What book explicitly links the Gallen painting to Sibelius' tone poem? Or did you mean links Gallen and Sibelius as friends? I'd be interested to know. I remember seeing the Moran on your page at one point! :) So, I guess we both find this painting very captivating and beautiful. Of all the artworks, in my mind this is what I "see" when I listen to The Oceanides! I wish we could have saved it. Sgvrfjs (talk) 05:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
              • yes I personally want the Moran back far more than I want the Gallen-Kallela (sorry, no offense). As for the link b/w the painting and the tone poem, see Finnish Music Quarterly 2003, but it's a snippet view. The text basically says "The theme of the Oceanides was not unfamiliar among Sibelius' circle of friends, in fact S's friend G-K painted Aallottaret in 1909" Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:54, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
• For your email to your source: "published" can also mean "publicly displayed", so you should say "published or publicly displayed". Sorry so late with this info   Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks Lingzhi. I will send a follow up on Friday. Hopefully we can get this issue resolved! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 06:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
    • @Lingzhi: I was going to add that I think we make a great team! If you ever want to help out on my other articles in the works, please feel more than free to do so. E.g., Madetoja here or a past but unfinished project En saga here. Sgvrfjs (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
      • I have a big project (radically different from Sibelius) started in ], so that will be somewhat of a priority, but I'm very happy to chip in and help now and than. Cheers!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:07, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Teosto Article

Hi there Sgvrfjs! I wanted to let you know that I added the {{expand finnish|Teosto}} template to the article Teosto. Also, I wanted to point you at Category:Translators_fi-en in case you wanted to attempt to recruit one of these brave folks directly to expand the article into English from the Finnish article. Chrisw80 (talk) 06:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks! Can't say I'll really actively recruit, since TEOSTO is pretty small ball with respect to the Madetoja bio. But thanks for taking the time to add the template. Cheers! Sgvrfjs (talk) 06:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Painting rescue

Am making progress on rescuing those two paintings; User talk:Finnusertop was very helpful with Finnish translation to help with the Gallen-Kallela (which is misnamed, BTW, so I'm going to move it).  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

You two are welcome! I'm happy to help with Finnish translations as well as sources regarding any articles you might be working on. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Outstanding @Lingzhi:! And thank you so much for your help @Finnusertop:! Lingzhi is correct that I write a lot about Sibelius and his works, but now my current major project is actually a biograph expansion of Leevi Madetoja. I have been doing pretty well with English language sources (even if they are hard to hunt down), but on some of the more minor details, it will be nice to have someone who can help me translate the Finnish language sources. I'm sure you'll be hearing from me, as I will begin keeping a running list. Do you translate whole pages or just snippets? Sgvrfjs (talk) 18:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I can translate longer texts as well, or verify if they contain information you need. I can even help with obtaining Finnish language sources, since I obviously have better access to them in eg. libraries. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks to User:Finnusertop, you can now use File:Aallottaria Gallen 1909.jpg (note slight name change). Put it wherever you want. I am still working on the Moran.   Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 09:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Any word on the Stoeckel images? Without help from your source, they probably must be removed, and they are clearly more important than any and all paintings.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 20:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

@Lingzhi: Sorry, my friend, but nothing from her yet. I wrote a nice and detailed message talking about their importance. I suggest that I could follow up in a week. I couldn't agree with you more! My hopes are low, though: I recall when I talked to her over the telephone last summer that I asked about who took the photos, and I think she said that they have no idea. It is probable, however, that the images are part of the Stoeckel estate, which upon their death became the property of Yale University. And it was she, an employee of Yale, that gave us (and I should mention, other websites and reporters too) permission to use the photos with attribution to the Yale School of Music Norfolk Music Festival. But I don't know the law. Thoughts? Sgvrfjs (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I suggest that we remove those photos now. ... OK, I just now removed several. I will find time to double-check the ones I didn't remove.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 01:55, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

@Lingzhi: Many thanks! I'll pop over to The Oceanides tomorrow and add the Gallen painting and look at the other images. Too bad on the images you had to (justifiably) delete, but perhaps we'll be able to reclaim them eventually. I am currently on the hunt for an image of Madetoja gravestone but can't find any on Wikicommons or under Google for free usage. I have written to this blogger ...maybe he'll allow Misplaced Pages to use the photo (under that own work tag you sometimes see?). Would this be possible (i.e., survive any future FAC review)? Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 06:27, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

• The blogger would have to publish it somewhere (such as Flickr, perhaps) under a license compatible with Misplaced Pages. Gotta run now; more later.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 09:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
  • That might not cut it, Lingzhi. Finland has no Freedom of Panorama (FoP) for monuments. The gravestone was made in 1955 by Kalervo Kallio (d. 1969) so it's probably still copyrighted, and consequentially – given the lack of FoP – so are any photographs of it. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
    • Oh, that's unfortunate. :-( .  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 16:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
      • This just seems strange to me; how can one ever use a photo of a grave of sculpture then? How can articles use images of Sibelius's grave or Mannerheim's? Sgvrfjs (talk) 23:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
        • Sgvrfjs, I would assume that both Sibelius and Mannerheim's graves are below the threshold of originality. They are just that, gravestones, instead of elaborate memorials. Finnish law doesn't seem very lenient when there is an actual sculpture in question. Commons records 224 discussions where a photo was deleted and only eight where it was kept (mostly on the grounds that the picture consists mostly of the surroundings of the object). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:50, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Lingzhi: I'll answer anyway, in case it's of further use. I find Template:Photo requested quite useful. Set it to |in=Finland and the article appears in Category:Misplaced Pages requested photographs in Finland. A detailed request on the talk page is of course useful. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Help on Madetoja-related Finnish language translations

@Finnusertop: Hey! I am having trouble finding solid information on the marriage between Madetoja and L. Onerva in English-language sources. No book on L. Onerva, to my knowledge, exists in English. Her Finnish Misplaced Pages page is pretty detailed, but the Google translate is kind of choppy. I was hopeful you could translate for me the relevant passages. Even better, I think it also contains links to the Finnish language book. I'm not sure how much you're willing to invest, but if you have access to it/them and can find information about 1) their courtship; 2) their marriage; 3) why their marriage was childless; 4) where they made their home; 5) their relation with alcoholism; 6) their relation with Eino Leino; and 7) their deaths, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks!! Sgvrfjs (talk) 08:04, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sgvrfjs. I've translated the relevant section of the article on Finnish Misplaced Pages here: Draft:L. Onerva (and might translate the rest of it; it's pretty detailed like you said). Reading it should give you rough idea. Unfortunately, your question about where thy made their home (before Onerva being hospitalized) isn't answered. I have access to both books; Mäkelä's is in my local library so I can get it anytime. Nieminen's is in the city library, but I can get it when I happen to be thereabout. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: You're absolutely awesome!! Thanks so much, and for the quick turn around. I'll read through your draft tonight after work and see what content I get. If I have any unanswered questions, then I might ask for you to check for me in either of books you have access to; thanks for your willingness. Does you're library also have the Madetoja biography by Salmenhaara? Sgvrfjs (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, my local library has Salmenhaara, Erkki (1987) Leevi Madetoja (Helsinki: Tammi). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: Great! Would you mind grabbing it, too, of course at your convenience. It's the definitive biography, and I will eventually like to use it to fill in some gaps in the English language sources and to double check a few dates. Many thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I've got those (Salmenhaara 1987 and Mäkelä 2003) now. I started reading on when and where Madetoja and Onerva moved together, but it seems rather complex and happened gradually rather than at a specific time and place. I'll give you the specifics after I've figured it out. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: So many thanks to you for doing this. I'm a bit tied up at work lately, but soon I'll be returning to the Madetoja article and seeing to plunder your mind! Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

knock knock2

• Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/The Oceanides/archive1  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 12:42, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Poul Knudsen

@Ipigott: Hey! Hope you've been well and have had a productive start to 2016. I have a quick question about Danish music and I recall you are pretty informed on this topic. What's the deal with the librettist Poul Knudsen, who wrote Sibelius's Scaramouche and Madetoja's Okon Fuoko? I was hoping to link up to his page in the Madetoja biography I am at work on, but can't seem to find one under any language. Also ran a Google search and...well, nothing that I can find anywhere! Why has this man been so completely forgotten? Any information would help. Sgvrfjs (talk) 01:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

• Sometimes a lifetime of hopes and aspirations earns only a redlink, or less. This links to this, if you want to start a stub.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:11, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Poul Knudsen is mentioned on about a dozen pages in Salmenhaara's book. I'll provide details upon request. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:55, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
    • Wow...it really does take a village to raise an article. Thanks to you both; and Finnusertop, any translation you have of the Salmenhaara is much appreciated. Feel free to post details on the talk page of the madetoja article in my sandbox. Also, the English sources have so little on Madetoja's death. I was hopeful you might be able to find out about what he died of, where, and I have also heard rumblings about alcoholism for both he and Onerva. Also, what of these purported plans for a violin concerto and a third opera, both of which never came to fruition. Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
• You seem to have received the help you needed. I didn't realise my talk page was such a useful information tool. As for Madetoja, you are doing an excellent job on his biography. I haven't been able to find out much about the circumstances of his death online but I see there are a number of books in Finnish and Swedish which can probably provide details.--Ipigott (talk) 10:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

A draft now available at Draft:Poul Knudsen. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Further translations from Salmenhaara 1987 requested

@Finnusertop: Hey, I was hopeful that the next sections you could translate for me from the Salmenhaara Finnish-language biography are, in order:

1. Madetoja's later years, especially the cause and location of death; any state or public memorial ceremonies; his struggle with alcoholism; final unfinished planned projects, such as a violin concerto and an opera.
2. Is there any information on Madetoja's reaction to the deaths of his brother (Yjro), Toivo Kuula, and his mother (Anna)?
3. Madetoja's early years, primarily his childhood (esp. details relating to his early training in music and composing; and, the death of his father and infant oldest brother; student years...what does Salmenhaara say exactly about his training with d'Indy and Fuchs?).
4. Content relating to The Ostrobothnians
5. Content relating to Juha
6. Content relating to the three symphonies (esp. information about the composition process, the premieres, and critical reactions).
7. Is there any information on his relationship with Onerva (I know you translated the Finnish Misplaced Pages page on Onerva, but I was wondering what Salmenhaara had to say).
8. Is there any source information on two quotes that I reproduce in the article, citing English language sources, but for which I cannot find the original source information (in other words, I am in search of the publication in which Fantapié and Parland made their original statements):
   1. Some years later, the French music writer, Henri-Claude Fantapié, described the cheerful, pastorale Third Symphony as a "sinfonia Gallica" in spirit and explained the premiere as thus: "The listeners expected the opera to be followed by a nationalistic anthem and were disappointed to hear something that seemed to them to be hermetic and that, to crown it all, was lacking in pomposity and solemnity … the properties the majority of Finnish music-lovers always expect in a new work."
   2. While in general Finnish composers have, as a group, labored in (and struggled to be free of) the titanic shadow of Sibelius, with respect to Madetoja, something else might also be at play: Madetoja's eschewal of Romantic excess in favor of restraint, perhaps, has made him a tougher sell to audiences. As the music critic, Ralf Parland , wrote in 1945: "Because Madetoja never makes any concessions to the listener, his music has not gained the position it deserves in the public's awareness. People are now beginning to open their ears to it. But that he deserves far greater attention, and that his music is both rare and precious and not simply a poor edition of the music of Sibelius—that is something they have not yet learnt"

Sooooooooo many thanks, once again; please take your time, or if you're tired of this project or have other irons in the fire, you are of course free to walk away at any time! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 23:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I will rather not translate entire sections from the book. I think the best way to do this if you ask questions - and the more specific, the better.

1. Madetoja died around 11am on 6 October 1947 in the Konkordia Methodist hospital in Helsinki. According to Salmenhaara, there are no records of what his final illness was. Critics praised him in obituaries and Onerva published a poem in his memory. The funeral was on 11 October in the Helsinki Old Church. The president did send a wreath to the funeral, as did the Ministry of education, the city of Oulu and many other institutions. I'd say the funeral was both private and public, but not a state funeral per se. The memorial on his grave was unveiled in 1955 and a statue was put up in Oulu in 1962 (by Aarre Alltonen). Finnish Misplaced Pages has some more on commemorations: there is a prize named after him - fi:Madetoja-palkinto, as well as a couple of streets, a high school and a concert hall. The question about alcoholism is quite broad, I'd rather return to it once I've read up on it. Among unfinished works a composition for the poem "Ikävyys" (Tristesse) by Aleksis Kivi and a Requiem is mentioned.
2. Leevi was naturally saddened over Yrjö's death. The book has a gloomy letter sent by Leevi to Anna where he laments Yrjö's death. But more importantly, the letter makes it clear that the Civil War was a perilous time and they could all be dead at any moment. He addresses Anna: "I don't know if you are alive at the time of writing". Leevi dedicated his Kuoleman puutarha (The Garden of Death) to Yrjö, and got it published by Hansen. Kuula's death also saddened Madetoja, who wrote a number obituaries of him. Madetoja also finished some unfinished works of Kuula (a Stabat mater, Karavaanikuoro (Choir of Caravan), "Meren virsi" (Hymn of the Sea) for a male choir and "Virta venhettä vie" (The Stream Carries the Boat) for a mixed choir, but wished them to remain exclusively attributed to Kuula. Madetoja intended to author Kuula's biography with Toivo Tarvas, but they never did. Of all these deaths, Anna's (26 March 1934) hit him the hardest. He was so devastated that he got physically ill and had to take a leave of two weeks. He could not even attend the funeral. With a part of his inheritance, Madetoja covered the printing costs of the score of the 2nd Symphony, which he dedicated to Anna.

I'll answer the rest later. Have fun! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

References

1. Pulliainen (2001), p. 5 sfnp error: no target: CITEREFPulliainen2001 (help)
2. Salmenhaara (2011) sfnp error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara2011 (help)
3. Salmenhaara 1987, p. 350. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)
4. ^ Salmenhaara 1987, p. 351. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)
5. Salmenhaara 1987, p. 352. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)
6. Salmenhaara 1987, pp. 171–172. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)
7. Salmenhaara 1987, p. 200. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)
8. Salmenhaara 1987, p. 173. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)
9. Salmenhaara 1987, p. 279. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalmenhaara1987 (help)

Thanks a bunch. Such useful information!! Already beginning to incorporate it. Hey, I found this here: "L. Onerva’s second marriage, to a famed composer Leevi Madetoja, turned out unhappy and turbulent. Both partners ultimately became alcoholics; Madetoja signed into a rehabilitation center but L. Onerva, as a woman, was committed against her will to a mental institution and kept there for five years. Although apparently cured, she was not released by her doctors until her husband’s death in 1947, according to her doctors so that she would not disturb his work as a composer."

And also this here: "In the late 1920s Onerva's health started to waver. She had already abandoned plans to finish her dissertation on the French Rococo art. Partly due to her excessive use of alcohol and psychic problems, she spent long times in hospitals, but still writing and also drawing. Her husband fell in love with his young student, Taru Pellinen; in 1927 he even proposed to her in a letter. Madetoja was a celebrated composer, and Onerva's own work as a poet was shadowed by his fame. Pursi, a collection of poems which came out in 1945, was an expression of her loneliness a cry for help. Onerva felt that her husband had deserted her, like her father did to her mother. Moreover, literary circles ignored her. Onerva was not mentioned in Unto Kupiainen's history of Finland's literature, Suomen kirjallisuuden vaiheet (1958). In 1947, after Onerva's husband had died of alcohol, she was released permanently from Nikkilä Psychiatric Hospital, where she was sent in 1942 against her will. There is indirect evidence, that she was in the hospital far longer than it was necessary on medical grounds. What is beyond doubt is that she was betrayed by her own doctor. "I am a fully normal person," she wrote to Madetoja, but doctor Jalmari Lydecken, his friend, wanted to let the composer work in peace, and turned down her appeals. During this period Onerva wrote manically in the small study provided her by the hospital."

Sensational, in both meanings of the word! But neither is what I consider to be adequate sourcing; I think we can do better. What say the two books in your possession? Is there any truth to the story that Onerva remained locked up for Madetoja's composing?! :) :) :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Sgvrfjs. I'm going to be extremely busy in life so I won't be able to make great contributions to this project. If you have specific questions about the sources, I will answer them, but I won't be able to make much reading, translating, or writing. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Template for Tone poems

Maybe you could include a template similar to {{Handel operas}} in your artciles witha a collapsable list of the 13 tone poems. It is just a suggestion. Cheers! I am vulturing around The Oceanides so when it gets FA status I can translate it. Triplecaña (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wood Nymph

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Wood Nymph you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Concertmusic -- Concertmusic (talk) 20:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wood Nymph

The article The Wood Nymph you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Wood Nymph for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Concertmusic -- Concertmusic (talk) 16:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I would hate to do this, but unless there is an indication of movement on the review of this article in the next day, I will need to fail this review. Thank you! --Concertmusic (talk) 22:32, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Concertmusic: I really appreciate you posting on my personal talk page about the GA on the Wood Nymph. I apologize for the hiatus I have taken from Misplaced Pages, but I am in the part of the semester where I am very busy at school. As such, I was planning on returning to the GA review (and making the necessary changes) around early May, once things cool down. I understand we are on a deadline for the GA review, but I did submit it in November back when I had more time. Maybe we can extend the period based on this reasoning? By the way, I really appreciate the review as well. Let me know if we can reach an agreement! Sgvrfjs (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Sgvrfjs: I have no issue with that. Having said that, I do believe that the Hold queue is reviewed every so often, as is the queue that times how long an article has been under review. If you are okay with it, I'll try to play the system by putting the review back to Under Review, and then switch it to On Hold, and go back and forth to keep it alive until you have time to address the review notes. How does that sound? Thank you! --Concertmusic (talk) 23:12, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Concertmusic: I think that sounds perfect. Look at you, working the system! :) Thanks. Sgvrfjs (talk) 00:48, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Concertmusic, the reviewer has a significant amount of discretion as to how long to keep a review open, but people will start to wonder about a review that has shown no progress in a month, much less the two it will become. I'd recommend a post from Sgvrfjs on the Talk:The Wood Nymph/GA1 page, pointing out that time has been in extremely short supply due to an ever busier last several weeks of the semester, and promising to make progress again on the review issues starting in early May (better to be a bit more specific on the timing than that, actually, so you aren't expected to start earlier than you planned), when the semester winds down. If you then agree to the delay, there's nothing more to be said. Then you can put the review back on hold, where it belongs. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

BlueMoonset Thank you BlueMoonset - that is valuable advice. I will switch the article back to On Hold, and will make a short note on that page myself, in addition to your suggestion for Sgvrfjs. Thank you! --Concertmusic (talk) 12:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

FA

Precious again, your first FA The Oceanides!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

• Belated congrats on the FA! I knew it was coming.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Await incoming translation to Spanish! Good job! Triplecaña (talk) 10:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks, Triplecaña! Spread the word! Sgvrfjs (talk) 20:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
      • Also just realized that I never thanked Gerda Arendt and Lingzhi for their kind congrats! I appreciated the help of you both! Hope your current projects go well. Sgvrfjs (talk) 20:02, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
        • When would you like the FA to appear as TFA? - I have an article on tone poems, improvements welcome, - I sadly have no time, - planning another FA ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wood Nymph

The article The Wood Nymph you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:The Wood Nymph for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Concertmusic -- Concertmusic (talk) 22:41, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Jean Sibelius

In your opinion what is needed for JS article to be FA? Maybe developing the sections Nature or francmasonery or merge them into others. In the Spanish version which I've recently translated I've added info about Sibelius euro coins and collector coins. Maybe we should include more about 150th anniversary but without falling into recentism. Reply anywhere you want. Triplecaña (talk) 11:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@Triplecaña: Hey! Nice to hear from you and thanks for your work on the Sibelius articles, both at English Misplaced Pages and Spanish Misplaced Pages. I don't often have the chance to get into a substantive conversation with a fellow editor (I kind of do my own thing), so I'll take this as an opportunity to swerve slightly into a few related topics I have been thinking about. But first, to your specific question about my thoughts on the Sibelius main article. I have a confession: I've never read the whole thing. Not for a lack of interest or passion: Sibelius is without question my favorite composer and I love his life story about as much as I love his music. But time is a finite commodity, and I already shouldn't edit here as often as I do.

And with that in mind, pushing a solid GA article up to FA just doesn't motivate me, especially when it pertains to a major composer about whom it is easy to find information in libraries and all over the internet. Would I like the Sibelius article to be FA? Of course. Am I willing to do it? Not at present. I am far more motivated by the injustice (how hyperbolic of me) of seeing lower-top tier and middle tier composers with stub and start class designations. Often it is very difficult to find good information on these composers and so this is where I think Misplaced Pages could come in and help curious consumers of classical music.

Composers like Leevi Madetoja, Erkki Melartin, Kurt Atterberg, Wilhelm Stenhammar, Hugo Alfvén, Johan Svendsen...these are our lost Nordic treasures, and they deserve better, more comprehensive encyclopedic entries for people who can't afford to buy the CDs (to obtain liner notes) or read Finnish or Swedish or Norwegian text. As such, I have set aside my earlier project of working on the Sibelius tone poems, such as The Oceanides or The Wood Nymph or even my draft of En saga, to work on a complete overhaul and massive expansion of the Leevi Madetoja content.

Sometimes I can't help but think to myself: how great would it be if every person on the Wikiproject Composers pledged to bring TWO lower-top or middle tier composers each up to GA/FA status with in three years, or THREE within five years (of course within their area of specialty). By 2020 to 2022, we'd have what...60 to 120 top-notch articles for our readers to consume?! I'd knock out Madetoja, Atterberg, and Melartin...someone like you, from Spain, could do de Falla, Granados, and Albeniz...hey, we can dream, can't we?

Anyway, thanks for listening to my non-answer to your question (sorry!). I do have a better lede I wrote last year for the Sibelius page, so feel free to look there if you like. I gave up on it because my lede was too different from and made reference to things that just weren't in the main body, and I (like I said above) had no interest in joining the team because I'm not a great collaborator. Also, feel free to pop by the Madetoja page if you like; I always can use suggestions. Happy editing (and listening)! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 05:40, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks for the long reply. I can see you are a lone wolf. I've been following your contributions to Madetoja and it's really impressive. Bringing an article to FA is months works, and its harder if you have a couple of hours per week. I totally understand your point: I want to focus on Joaquín Turina but its hard to find bibliography. I like doing translations sucking from others research (I'll always verify the information if possible as I did with Gabriel Fauré). But the pleasure to create from scratch an article is way better es:Intempo. I heard about Madetoja because on Radio Clásica in Spain "Los raros" and The symphonic universe of Madetoja. Would you please read Sibelius? Your intro is great and I will probably use it. One question: we all now that Sibelius writes nationalistic music, but why is not mentioned that he forms parts of the Musical nationalism movement. I promised to translate The Oceanides, and I will start soon. Triplecaña (talk) 10:33, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 11 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Juha (Madetoja) page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sgvrfjs. 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 Misplaced Pages 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)

Symphonies

"You don't own the page; please reach out to me before undoing my work." Of course I don't own the page. Do you think that all of the composers listed should (ideally) include their main instruments and other areas of work? It could be a big job, copying all that information from their biographical articles into the list. Further, does the list require annotations for each symphony? The Haydn list alone could take some while to fill out. Or do you have some sort of filtering criteria in mind? Other comparable lists (such as the List of compositions for violin and orchestra) do not include such details. Your thoughts would be appreciated.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jerome Kohl: Hi, Jerome. Look, I too don't want to edit war, and I think I can be forgiven for interpreting the reversal of my edits as smacking of some kind of ownership. I know you are very active on the page and have done great work on it, but that means also that you know: 1) I have contributed to the page many times before; 2) many of my contributions (e.g., Sibelius, Nielsen, Scriabin, Tchaikovsky) have added small blurbs; and, 3) these have not been reversed before. So, if the issue is that you don't see the value in blurbs, then all of these (not just the Madetoja) should be eliminated; if the issue is that you don't think Madetoja is perhaps as notable as the others (which I would agree with) but that blurbs for the major symphonists are useful, then we'd need to work together, as you note, to find some kind of cut-off point. I tend to think that small blurbs are helpful, because as a reader I often don't have time to search long biographical pages or hunt around composition pages for information, especially since for many composers, the biography pages are not of great quality. Now, I'm happy to cut off at the top symphonists, but everyone will have a different list of who is and who is not Top 20 or Top 30.

But, my final point is this: I'm making good-faith edits and have a record on Misplaced Pages of editing on Nordic composers; true, I haven't served the community as much and as importantly as have you (sincere point), but I'm not a hack. And my honest opinion is that the page as it stands tries to adhere to, but is not always successful at, following a uniform style. I didn't think up the blurbs on my own; I saw some entry have it on the page, and so I wrote one for Sibelius...then Tchaikovsky...etc. I didn't think up on my own to mention that Madetoja's fourth symphony is lost; I saw that someone else had already mentioned similar things on Stenhammar and numerous other composers. And as for other instruments, I was deleting the violinist reference from Sinding (or was it Halvorsen?), because that didn't adhere to the style of NAME (dates) nationality composer. Let's start a cheerful dialogue; else I'll just retreat and leave the page to you (and without hard feelings). Happy editing. Sgvrfjs (talk) 00:10, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit: I missed one of your points. Of course I don't think every symphony needs annotation; true, the decision of which ones to mention is subjective, but scholars do this all the time and the Haydn example you cite, if my memory serves me correctly, already does something like this on a smaller scale. I guess I need to know: is the list only supposed to say the composer's number of symphonies (and mention by name specific works that might be regarded as symphonies (e.g. Kullervo for Sibelius or The Little Mermaid for Zemlinsky) and/or symphonies that have been lost/destroyed/disowned/not finished (e.g., Mahler 10, Stenhammar 1, Madetoja 4), or is it also supposed to opine slightly on the composer, such as Haydn having "clarity and wit"? Sgvrfjs (talk) 00:18, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Given that you had removed the violinist reference from one entry, am I right in assuming it was not actually your intention, when you reversed my edit, to restore the similar material which I had removed from three other entries? I see nothing wrong with mentioning lost, unfinished, or withdrawn symphonies, or symphonies in fact that are not so named (or, on the other hand, pieces called "symphony" that do not actually qualify). The issue is rather what the limit should be for such annotations. It seems to me it would be well to establish at least some rough guidelines, preferably on the Talk page for the list, before opening the list to all manner of accretions since, as you suggest, opinions are bound to differ and Misplaced Pages editors are not all the scholars to which you refer.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:41, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jerome Kohl: You are correct that I had not realized you had also removed references to the instruments of other composers; my mistake, I thought it a mere blanking of the Madetoja, Stenhammar, and Alfven edits I'd made. Well, past is past, and we have a dialogue now. Guidelines seem good; might I get the ball rolling with:

For more minor composers:

Leevi Madetoja (1887–1947), Finnish composer of 3 symphonies written between 1916 and 1926, as well as a lost fourth symphony.

OR

Alexander von Zemlinsky (1871–1942), Austrian composer of 2 numbered symphonies written between 1892 and 1897, as well as a partially-lost symphony in E minor (1891); further, Zemlinsky composed a Lyrische Symphonie for soprano, baritone, and orchestra (1923) and a Sinfonietta (1934), as well as a symphony in all but name, the tone poem Die Seejungfrau (1902).

And for major contributors to the symphony (still undefined), something like the entries I wrote for Tchaikovsky and Sibelius, that helps to point readers to where to start in the symphonic canon.

I'm not sure that it is necessary to mention years of composition, which could lead to attempts to do the same thing for (say) Haydn. An exception might be lost, withdrawn, and similar works. As for pointing readers to the major works in the form (and explaining what constitutes a "major" symphony), isn't that what the Symphony article is supposed to be for?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:20, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jerome Kohl: I think we're on (or close to) the same page, now. Thanks for discussing. I've made some edits to Sibelius, Tchaikovsky, Nielsen, Madetoja, Stenhammar, Svendsen, Bizet, and Strauss. Please feel free to check out! Sgvrfjs (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Request

Could you please create Maan Virsi (Hymn of the Earth) op.95. I've seen it also named Hym to the Earth. It is really uplifting and cheerful. I have created Vaino's Song in Spanish es:La canción de Väinö. Do you want me to translate it? Triplecaña (talk) 11:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

The Oceanides scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the The Oceanides article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 4 June 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/June 4, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Help with Template:Classical works row

@Gerda Arendt: Hi, Gerda. I am trying to convert the Sibelius list of compositions into the type of sortable table that people seem to prefer, and I wanted to use your template from Nielsen, a number of features of which I like. I would, however, wonder if you could help me make some changes, since I don't know how. I want the following parameters: 1) Title; 2) Op. ; 3) JS; 4) K; 5) year; 6) genre; 7) type; and, 8) notes. So, for example, I'd like it to look like this:

I don't really feel the need for separate columns for translation and key, and I don't think I'll utilize score. I would, however, like the description parameter to load under type rather than genre. So, for example, for Scaramouche, Orchestral for genre and Ballet-pantomime for type and, underneath the words ballet-pantomime, the phrase in 3 acts for description. The reason I would like to disaggregate genre and type is that, with the Nielsen list, the only thing I don't like is that I cannot sort ALL orchestral music together. Hence the need, I think, to convert genre into orchestral (or choral, or chamber, etc.) and the type into the specific composition form (like symphony, opera, string quartet, etc.) As a rough example, see the Dvorak page, in which genre is used as a meta sort and scoring is used as a more narrow sort.

Thanks for your help! I'd love it if we can work together on this; it'll probably be my hobby project in Dec. I've started the project at User:Sgvrfjs/Sibelius_loc. Sgvrfjs (talk) 05:45, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps the score parameter can be hijacked to be for notes/comments, since Sibelius doesn't have a comparable CNW database. I also wanted to elaborate why I don't like a translation column: sometimes the native language term is what is used over the translation. And if each gets it's own equal column, the reader is left not knowing whether the swedish/finnish or the english title is 'what's used'. This is why I prefer one column for the title, with the sorting by the commonly used title and the other options beneath it in the same column as a break. For example, En saga is Swedish and The Oceanides is English. Sgvrfjs (talk) 07:02, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughts. For actual template changes, better ask Andy. I wonder about year before Catalogue, tried to keep the order as in the normal lead: name, key, cat(s), year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:10, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Which template? I suggest raising your proposals on its talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

{{Classical works row}}, as the title says, used for Max Reger works, for example, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Global rename

I have renamed this account from "Sgvrfjs" to "Silence of Järvenpää". The change of name applies to all Wikimedia projects, the two that are relevant to your editing history being English Misplaced Pages and Wikimedia Commons. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Kullervo publication history

Salutations to a fellow Sibelian! Thank you for your message. Since this is Thursday, Sibelius is my favourite composer; on other days of the week, Delius, Vaughan Williams or Ravel might come top. but Sibelius is the one I have the deepest interest in.

Alas, I don't have much information on Kullervo's publication history. The score I worked from in transcribing it for performance was borrowed, and my whole library is in storage. I'll check whether I have anything useful backed up in the cloud, and I'll try & get in touch with my friend who loaned me the score, so we can pin down the date of that one.

If you would like a copy of the full score that I edited, I can let you have it as a PDF (also parts & a couple of reductions), or as a Sibelius® score file if you have that software. I can also export a few other score formats. Let me know.

I had to edit the score extensively as there were errors in the original, as well as it being unreadable--copyist's manuscript & miniature score. I hadn't thought of uploading my score to IMSLP; until fairly recently, I thought Sibelius was still copyright, and he may be so in the US, but not here in Canada where I reside.

I don't think I'm up to doing a musical analysis of Kullervo, though I'm honoured to be asked. I am so happy thet you're updating the articles on Sibelius' music! I look forward to reading your article on the Oceanides, one of favourite pieces; to me it captures the essence of the sea better than Debussy or RVW or anyone.

Ciao, and let me know if you want my working scores. Feel free to stay in touch! --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 01:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Kullervo's 130th

@Gerda Arendt: @Ipigott:

→ (?): Kullervo, Op. 7 (sandbox).

Greetings! My ambition is for FA by the 130th anniversary of its premiere (28 April 2022). What a milestone it will be! Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Silence of Järvenpää: That should certainly be possible. Let's see what we can do.--Ipigott (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

today

See my talk today, - it's rare that a person is pictured when a dream comes true, and that the picture is shown on the Main page on a meaningful day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

As it happens, just yesterday I thought of you listening to the Violin Concerto in the first concert of 2021, and the president gave a reception ;) - I'll add pics, - video of the speech (in German) is already on my talk. Great music! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Awe! Thanks, @Gerda Arendt:! Doing well... I moved what I'd been working on to Discography of Sibelius symphony cycles. Quite a large expansion, but it was a lot of fun! Can you believe one editor told me that they worry it might not be appropriate content for Misplaced Pages—i.e., "fandom"? Certainly got me thinking and worrying! I think the bigger concern is that, in my zeal, it became less of a list and more of an article; not sure how those over at FLC (once nominated) will look upon this! Maybe I'll just avoid star-hunting altogether. Do feel free, of course, to poke around! Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Impressive. Without having looked at details: that's a great DYK article now! And if they don't want it as FL, it could become a GA easily. Will you nominate for DYK? - The Violin Concerto article is not yet what it could be, - do you agree? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Gerda Arendt:! I have no idea how to go about the DYK circuit, but if you'd like, please do feel free to nominate it and shepherd it through! Yes, the Violin Concerto article is an embarrassment. But I tend to stay away from Sibelius articles that have so many editors watching... the Concerto, the symphonies, his bio. I'm just afraid of edit wars and trolls; I easily get discouraged as an editor, as you well know. When it stops being 'fun,' I bolt. I'm not willing to do the Violin Concerto by myself. But if it's something you'd like to do together, then I could offer to write the following sections: History (Compositions; Performances) and Discography. I just have no interest in doing the musical analysis section. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 21:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Understand, reluctance for both DYK and the concerto. I'll do the DYK, not now though, I'm late with the nom for an article that is still too short and due today. I have too many neglected projects of my own to tackle the other. Here's the Concerto, today's version. ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, why do we need Category:Concertos by Jean Sibelius if he only wrote one? Haha... what a laughable container! Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 21:13, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Laughing is good for your health ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I went ahead on nominated Discography of Sibelius symphony cycles over at FLC. I do hope you'll have a moment to give it a read through. I do value your feedback. Warmly, Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Kim Dae-jin

I feel ashamed for taking so much time with this, but I was finally in Helsinki, so here are the runtimes. All recordings were done in 2015. From the CD liners:

@Finnusertop (talk · contribs) Thanks so much, my friend! Did you happen to get photos, because I still would need to know the months and days of recording (not just the year), so as to know where precisely to place it in the table! No worries if not. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:18, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I just took notes. I do remember however that there was at least May, and then some later in the year, October through December, perhaps. What I have meticulous notes on is which symphony is on what CD and the runtimes of each individual movement. If you need the dates or any other info, I will be able to pay another visit to the library during Christmas holiday.

Sorry for procrastinating with this and the other tasks. I haven't forgotten about them; I'm simply lazy and distracted. In particular, I need to thank you for making me bite the bullet and get the subscription to Helsingin Sanomat. I've had so much fun reading the archives! And that's another resource if you need anything. By the way, you can link to Suwon Philharmonic Orchestra  on the Korean Misplaced Pages if you like.

Oh, and congratulations on the FL. You are truly the greatest Sibelian I know, with considerable organizational talent! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Cheers – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:50, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Discography of Sibelius symphony cycles

@Silence of Järvenpää – Congrats! Great work! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:44, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kavyansh.Singh @PresN @Aza24 – Thank you so much, my friends, for seeing the Discography of Sibelius symphony cycles over the FL line, rather than leaving it for dead! I do apologize for having disappeared from Misplaced Pages, but sometimes the business of the real world intervenes... I do hope I will be back soon, for more Sibelius content improvement. Happy editing and thanks again for your service to the community! Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 17:19, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Sibelius Symphony No. 7 discography

Hello, Silence of Järvenpää,

Just a reminder that any time you tag a page on Misplaced Pages for any type of deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/TFD/etc.), you must post a notification on the talk page of the page creator. It is part of the deletion process and can not be skipped over. Content creators have a right to know when pages they have created have been tagged for deletion and, importantly, why they are being tagged for deletion.

Many editors have found it handy to make use of Twinkle when they tag pages for deletion. Once you set up your Preferences to "Notify page creator", Twinkle will post these talk page messages for you which makes things convenient and easy. Please post these notifications in any deletion taggings you do in the future. Thank you. Liz 16:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

–MJL ‐Talk‐ 17:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)