User talk:Intforce/Archive 2021

2833:

I search up Op. 10 No. 8 on the internet or Spotify even, it seems like "Sunshine etude" is the name people associate the piece with, it's the same when searching up "Sunshine etude". In the online International Chopin Competition, the etude would be accompanied by "Sunshine". It didn't really sit right with me to give a source for what people have been calling these etudes for the longest time. Hence, I doubt that a citation is required for what the etude is known as, and I have also reverted . If it is possible, I would also like to add the names to the rest of the etudes' articles, as I like to think that their known names give the pieces a little bit more meaning.

3153: 171: 31: 701: 274: 1416: 1866: 2194: 2098: 1547: 1321: 1164: 599: 1256: 1913: 442: 1746: 1978:

whisky article. I ceased making edits on the whisky article and am engaging in good-faith discussion on the whisky talk page, as you would see if you took some time to review. I note that your reverts would appear to be disruptive behavior. I encourage you to carefully reflect upon your actions and to cease disruption of good faith, accurate, and relevant edits.

1695: 2519:), but you simply deleted that information and left the article without it! I know you'll think this is irrelevant, but I've created over 2,000 biographical articles, and this is the first time I can recall that this has been an issue. I'm assuming you have a special interest here because you've worked on the articles about TUM. 1635:. When you PRODed it, the article already had a source, so BLP is not a valid reason. However, the article as written fails GNG and so I'd endorse the prod if you were to change the rationale from BLP to GNG. Otherwise, the prod will likely be declined on technical reasons and we may have to take it to AfD. -- 2832:

I noticed that you've requested me to give a citation for the name of a Chopin etude. I'm not sure where it had originated from, however they are certainly well-known for their given names. An example of famous etudes of Chopin's would be Op. 25 No. 11 "Winter Wind" and Op. 10 No. 1 "Waterfall". When

1977:

Over the years, I have made many edits on this issue across several articles about alcoholic beverages. Other editors refined and added to my edits. My contributions have clearly been productive and have improved these articles. For whatever reason, some engaged editors objected to these edits on the

1490:

I do not plan on any further developments being made to the user script. I have released version 9.1.0 to both the dev and stable versions, which includes a notification about the extension being available when you use the user script. You can dismiss the notification, and the script still works, but

1043:

I think the reason for the policy is that they've been controversial before, so it's better to be safe about them. To be clear, I'm not saying to do anything now (the pages are already created, and I see no reason they should be deleted), just as a note for the future that this is technically classed

1025:

They're only doing one every minute or so, which seems to me like long enough to oversee each creation individually. They're only dab pages, after all; it's not like there is a lot of editorial discretion going on. If something stupid happens, they will be held responsible for it, and otherwise, who

2541:

I have no special interest in your article (it simply popped up on my watchlist), nor do I consider this a large issue. It is just a minor thing related to the MOS. An encyclopedia should have some sense of uniformity; that's what the MOS is for. Yes, they are guidelines, but as it says on the top,

1809:

Thank you for the GA review. Sadly I could only find a freely licensed recording of the third movement, which I have now incorporated into the article. I'm not a fan of electronic performances (especially with solo string instruments), so I wonder if we could have short audio excerpts as under fair

724:

Hi, I wrote that in a hurry and the article still needs significant work. I can refer you to Steinberg's book "The Concerto: A Listener's Guide" (pp. 484–488) though, which includes some information about the form. (Sadly not enough.) Once I have more time, I'll dig up some more sources and expand

125:

Hi Intforce, sorry that I reverted your edit. But I think it would be best to leave the article the way it was for the moment, until there's some conclusion reached and agreement. Nikkimaria has put a lot of work into the article, and I respect her opinion, even if I don't always agree with it. If

756:

I did some research and have expanded the form section with appropriate sources. To answer your question: no, the third section does not feature a development section, at least not a formal one. The form seems to be Intro → Theme 1 → Theme 2 → Variations on Theme 2 → Theme 1 → Theme 2 → Theme 1 →

3177:

I've performed some adjustments. Modern engravings emit the "M.M." (Mälzels Metronom) text; compare for example, the early editions of Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata, and newer urtext editions. This is not an editorial decision but rather part of modern engraving guidelines.

2542:

it is "a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply". I see no benefit in deviating from the MOS here, and a reasonable premise for an exception is not given.

1788: 2746:

Hi, I reverted your edit. You quoted policy and then removed a see also section . Quoting policy fair enough, but at least complete the action by doing the edit to move the section. Don't just delete it. That is elevating policy above content, which is wrong.

2570:

You seem to have taken offense at my edit, judging by your hostile tone. I was a simple edit and a polite notice on your talk page; I am entitled to my opinion as you are to yours. No need to make this personal. If you disagree, you disagree.

2720:. Suggestions included "island country", but consensus was reached for simply "country". If you want to change the wording, you'll have to start another discussion on the article's talk page, not treat this like a personal matter with me. 2688:. An experienced editor would usually not change the lead sentence of a highly controversial and visible topic without acquiring consensus first, especially when there's a detailed comment right there advising not to do precisely that. 3056:

Hello, Intforce! In my opinion, you have the neatest score formatting I've seen on Knowledge. I imagine that you are pretty busy, but if you got the time, could you kindly help me with putting 6 pieces of score (first line of bars) on

2877:, and the main argument is that while all etudes have nicknames, only a select few are widely used. Some people call 10/8 the "sunshine" etude. But this nickname does not originate from Chopin, and you need to prove its usage through 2047:

That grant has ended, and I have requested another grant to continue development of the extension, and figured subscribers of the newsletter about the user script might be interested. You can see and comment on the grant request at

862:

I've created a script to extract Opus/Op./op. from the first sentence of all pages on classical compositions. I'll be creating disambiguation pages for all opus numbers that have at least two composition pages on Knowledge. Thanks,

2982:

gave general advice to them on their user talk page and Johnuniq's comments on this article talk page are about exactly the same issue. In these circumstances you might consider reverting your changes, just for clarity. Thanks,

931:

While this is a kickass idea for most of the dabs, I think your script might be doing a little oopsie (or perhaps, in this case, a little oppsie). A bunch of the pages getting created only have two articles in them; the actual

1205: 234:

Thank you for more compositions, and with DYK. You don't have to add the DYK to an article talk, a bot does it. In the end, all of that can be removed because the credit contains a link to the by then closed discussion.

2145: 1926: 358:

article. As a general rule when it comes to the names of family members, unless they also are notable (have an article here) or the name is widely known and reliably sourced, we wouldn't add it to articles per

911:

Hi, I'm not done yet. It seems that my script missed some pages, so I'm considering an alternative approach. Be assured that those disambiguation pages won't just have one composition in the end. Cheers,

2763:

I disagree. Three unannotated links to articles that serve no benefit to the reader can hardly be called "content". Integrating them into the body of the article isn't as simple as moving the section.

299:

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

2464:

actually have the template at the bottom of them? It seems to be rather inconsistent at the moment. I'm not how long things like this take, but if its a substantial time then no worries. Best -

2049: 1787: 2870: 2237: 198: 189: 881:, which only has one piece in it, so I'm going to redirect it over to that piece. In these cases, the Op. xx page should just be a redirect. Please check over your creations again. Thanks. 2716:

I'm bewildered that you are unfamiliar with the consensus process, even though you've been here for 15 years. The exact wording of the lead sentence has been carefully deliberated in the

638: 1364: 106:

Can it be ascertained that this recording is definitely out of copyright? I ask because in 2010 I posted a sound recording from 1953, and was quickly reverted by XLinkBot for copyvio.

1963:

to them, and have asked you to stop. The content of your edits notwithstanding, you need to come to a consensus on each article's talk page if you wish to introduce any more changes.

3006:, including unexplained removal of unrelated content in suspected back-door coordination with other editor(s) who have publicly declared their own bias on the subject in the past. 940:

gets put on both of them. Just a heads-up -- if you're going to be adding more entries to these articles, this probably doesn't matter, but I figure you might like to know.

691: 1786: 3026: 974:

Worth noting that a bot approval is required for large-scale content/page creation, even if it's only "assisted editing" via a script rather than fully automated, per

2355:

Give me a break. I was just about to make another edit, expanding the article with reliable sources. I've written dozens of articles, including a GA, I'm well aware.

3148:

Hello again! Sorry for constantly bothering you with this, but the Notturno needs very minor adjustments. Could you kindly change the current tempo to Lento. (M. M.

1586: 698:

the sources so that I can advoid leaving the section unreferenced. Also, I wonder if the third movement has a development. I'm writing the section like a sandbox.

1753:, 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 397:

to your 4+ million followers sounds like intentional, widely dissemination to me. As the addition was reliably sourced, I have permitted the change as it passes

2790:

Greetings! I have a quick question for you. Being an experienced article creator on compositions, is it okay to use booklets of recordings as sources? Cheers.

393:

before making my decision. I believe that it does not apply in this case. Though "presumption in favor of privacy" usually holds, making an Instagram with the

1495: 500:

Is there any way to add an alternative pictorial one that wouldn't be copyright? The show's confusing, but the pictorial tree has been very helpful for me.

486:. If you add something, and people remove it, discuss it on the talk page before adding it again. Also, the file has been deleted on copyright violations. 185: 3085: 2393:

I've already done it. Next time, don't move new articles within five minutes of creation, it is well likely that the creator is still working on it.

1881:

within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.

126:

the content is to be put back over her objections, I would like at least for her objections to be properly heard and debated. Is that ok with you? --

1328: 1171: 606: 3160: 3066: 2252:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 2160:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 2382: 2343: 2084: 2037: 2030: 1533: 1480: 1473: 1601:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 1379:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 1220:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 653:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 2036:

Hi everyone. As I noted in the last issue, I received a grant last year from the WMF to develop the global watchlist script into an extension.

422: 3113:(the D) at the very end of the line, but that is completely fine and I don't think Knowledge requires this level of detail. Again, thank you! 2201: 2105: 1554: 1197: 1183: 3007: 2130: 2117: 1917: 3002:

This user stretched Knowledge's own definition of what constitutes a personal attack to try to deplatform me from editing the article on

725:

the article. Right now, I'm quite unsatisfied with the Form section, which is basically nothing but a sequence of themes and tonalities.

2624: 2075: 1524: 519: 308: 65: 2556:

Ah, of course, you know better than the hundreds (thousands?) of other editors who have seen my articles over the years. I understand.

2454:

Hey Intforce, I recall you doing some AWB clean up in the past. If you get a chance, could you check to make sure all the articles in

1873:

for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a

1860: 1740: 1004:) weren't created by me though; I've simply extended the idea. I'm done creating pages now. The work that remains is to expand them. 2881:. A Spotify or internet search does not qualify, neither does the website of a local radio station. A qualified source would be the 2322:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Knowledge's 2253: 2161: 1602: 1380: 1221: 654: 3152: 2435:

After checking out your user page, I see I was right to defer to you on piano matters, congratulations and keep up the good work!

184:, for taking care of youth orchestras around the globe, creating redirects, adding pronunciation, updating, for navboxes such as 2256:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 2164:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 1605:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 1383:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 1224:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 847:

My trick for finding the obscurities is to search for "Op. xx ." - the fullstop suppresses all direct links and redirects. Yrs,

657:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 3163:

Could you also change the last rest of the right hand in the second measure from 1 quarter rest to 2 eighth rests? Thank you -

3062: 2932: 2585:

Sorry, maybe it's because I'm an old hippie, but I get irritated when people cite chapter and verse...anywhere, not just here.

2376: 2337: 1698:

This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

1108: 1049: 987: 2079: 1528: 1276:(his friends called him that) would be appreciative. I do hope you go for GA, and, since you created the article, perhaps the 1996:

He was deleting INaccurate additions as none of the info you added was about the beverage itself. Pure disruptive to make a

177: 2327: 1147: 3022: 2858: 1870: 1754: 1151: 686: 2071: 2041: 2026: 1520: 1484: 1479:

As I noted in the last issue, I received a grant from the WMF to develop the global watchlist script into an extension.

1469: 1298:

Thanks, Aza :) I feel like a lot of work still needs to be done for GA, but perhaps it will get there one day. Cheers,

3074: 1795:. Do you think the article would benefit from any being Included? I can easily produce them, but they are electronic. 320: 1103:

I don't think it applies to non-content pages such as redirects, as long as the edits are not otherwise disruptive.

784: 747: 714: 2928: 2458: 2370: 2331: 2288: 2280: 2257: 2243: 2165: 2151: 1878: 1606: 1592: 1384: 1370: 1225: 1211: 1104: 1064: 1045: 1020: 983: 658: 644: 515: 377: 38: 3003: 1944:

Why are you deleting good faith edits that are accurate and relevant from the articles about alcoholic beverages?

314: 2809:

criteria, there is nothing wrong with using them. Sometimes the booklets are even written by reputable authors.

3058: 3011: 2222: 2213: 1856: 1849: 1736: 1729: 1681: 1674: 1143: 936:

seems murky, but in my experience, 2-entry dab pages usually end up as redirects to one of the articles, and a

350:, I see you just got your pending changes permission. I just wanted to let you know that I reverted the change 3069:, and I assume you are using Sibelius/Musescore to create the files and use the score as reference. Cheers - 2628: 514:

I'm afraid no, unless you some get permission from the rights holders. I'm not sure if this would fall under

467:

Hi, why does the Dark family tree keep getting removed? The visual tree is more helpful than the written one.

2921: 2874: 2707: 2668: 2421:

convincingly conventional, from what small samples I studied. You've given me a lot to think about, thanks.

2240:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 2148:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 1845: 1725: 1670: 1589:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 1367:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 1208:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 958:

Thanks for the notice (and the pun); let's see which dabs end up with less than 3 articles when I'm done :)

810: 641:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 627: 618: 563: 181: 111: 1783:

Hi intforce, the musical illustrations in the article are easy to convert into audio files, e.g. this one.

541: 505: 472: 3070: 2717: 2440: 2426: 2125: 1931: 1897: 1829: 1800: 1773: 1714: 1437: 1349: 1340: 1269: 1191: 1086: 975: 805:

Surprised that this had not already been done. You did great work and the article looks splendid so far! —

771:

Yeah, it does seem like that. Though some books says that there are 2 themes in the secondary tonal erea (

632: 289: 240: 210: 73: 3168: 3118: 2795: 2206: 2110: 1559: 1333: 1176: 852: 780: 743: 710: 611: 2611:

You removed the "prodigy" of the article that I had added. I added it because it is also present here:

2218:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 2122:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 1571:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 1345:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 1188:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 623:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 2846: 2620: 2315: 2007: 1924:

has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at

1277: 670: 430: 2444: 2430: 2943: 2060: 1979: 1945: 1509: 894: 293: 2850: 365:

The presumption in favour of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects

127: 3183: 3132: 3093: 3034: 2955: 2910: 2814: 2768: 2725: 2703: 2693: 2680: 2664: 2644: 2590: 2576: 2561: 2547: 2524: 2484: 2398: 2360: 2177: 1983: 1968: 1949: 1815: 1658: 1618: 1452: 1303: 1237: 1094: 1009: 979: 963: 917: 868: 825: 806: 762: 730: 527: 491: 452: 406: 332: 254: 225: 146: 107: 88: 47: 17: 2976:

editing when logged off (as earlier edits on the article page show). Some while back, the sysop

2837: 323:, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. 170: 2988: 2854: 2436: 2422: 2306:

and the page looks like it's a start. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (

2270: 1921: 1893: 1888: 1825: 1796: 1769: 1764: 1710: 1705: 1641: 1433: 1397: 937: 582: 390: 360: 236: 206: 131: 69: 2840:

I believe it's a credible source as it's the official website of a radio station in Chicago.

3164: 3114: 2791: 2750: 2139: 848: 537: 501: 468: 3025:. You are trying to portray yourself as the victim here. You are not. A user has opened an 1494:

Those interested in providing feedback for the extension should use the phabricator board,

1085:. I would like continue this pattern (Opus is commonly abbreviated Op without the period). 2660: 2498: 2469: 2227: 2002: 1997: 1689: 1285: 666: 426: 355: 292:, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at 288:

on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at

2740: 1750: 3187: 3172: 3136: 3122: 3097: 3078: 3038: 3015: 2992: 2959: 2936: 2914: 2862: 2818: 2799: 2772: 2757: 2729: 2711: 2697: 2685: 2672: 2648: 2632: 2594: 2580: 2565: 2551: 2528: 2502: 2488: 2473: 2402: 2388: 2364: 2349: 2274: 2231: 2181: 2064: 2056: 2013: 1987: 1972: 1953: 1934: 1901: 1833: 1819: 1804: 1777: 1718: 1662: 1647: 1622: 1513: 1505: 1456: 1441: 1401: 1354: 1307: 1289: 1273: 1241: 1112: 1098: 1053: 1038: 1034: 1013: 991: 967: 952: 948: 921: 906: 899: 882: 872: 856: 829: 814: 788: 766: 751: 734: 718: 695: 674: 586: 545: 531: 509: 495: 482:

Hi, I removed it because people, including you, keep trying to add that one in without

476: 456: 434: 410: 379: 375: 336: 258: 244: 229: 214: 150: 135: 115: 92: 77: 3179: 3143: 3128: 3104: 3089: 3051: 3030: 2951: 2906: 2810: 2785: 2764: 2721: 2689: 2640: 2586: 2572: 2557: 2543: 2536: 2520: 2480: 2394: 2356: 2323: 2173: 1964: 1811: 1654: 1614: 1583:

was premiered in a live BBC broadcast in 1937 and then forgotten for several decades?

1575: 1566: 1448: 1299: 1233: 1126: 1090: 1005: 959: 933: 913: 864: 821: 758: 726: 523: 487: 483: 448: 402: 398: 347: 328: 285: 250: 221: 202: 142: 84: 68:). Let me know if the new map is not what you you meant, and I'll amend it. Regards, 1930:

and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

844:- several major works, though IMO the Dvorak is the weakest of his late tone poems. 840:

I see you've been cleaning up some of these DAB pages. You've prompted me to create

141:

Thank you for taking your time to leave a respectful message here. I appreciate it.

2984: 2878: 2806: 2301: 2296: 2292: 2266: 1884: 1865: 1760: 1701: 1685: 1637: 1425: 1393: 578: 574: 273: 3110: 2311: 2307: 2193: 2097: 1960: 1546: 1358: 1320: 1163: 1122: 598: 249:

Oh, I didn't know that. It's my first DYK nomination, thanks for helping out :)

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2882: 2291:, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from 1415: 1361:

1, portrays four characters that differ in vocal register, rhythm, and harmony?

2494: 2465: 2247: 2155: 2135: 1912: 1596: 1374: 1281: 1215: 684:

Hi, sorry to bother you. I noticed that you have improved the Form section of

648: 1580: 1255: 1134:

Please note that this is a new state of affairs: The article was moved from

1028: 942: 567: 386: 369: 2998:

Biased editing and unwarranted threats of China-Lithuania relations article

1680:

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

2927:

Please dialog on the article talk page before you revert me there again.

1745: 3029:

on this; it would be best if you discuss this further there, not here.

2972: 1206:

Template:Did you know nominations/Caprice sur des airs danois et russes

878: 841: 103:

Hi - I've posted this message to Talk:Piano Sonata No. 14 (Beethoven):

2234:

as "a beautiful work, so youthful and fresh, as if it were his first"?

2050:

m:Grants:Project/DannyS712/Continued work on GlobalWatchlist extension

1694: 2052:- if you support this, I hope you'll consider endorsing the request. 1082: 1074: 1001: 176:

Thank you for beginning articles on classical chamber music such as

2146:

Template:Did you know nominations/Violin Sonata No. 1 (Saint-Saëns)

1877:

under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can

3021:

Your comments on the article's talk page are pretty much textbook

1784: 1078: 1070: 997: 2885:, which, as expected, only lists the most widely used nicknames: 562:

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

2978: 1272:—I particularly enjoyed the Arrangements section. I'm sure our 522:

whether your image would be a valid usage of non-free content.

2612: 25: 2838:

https://www.wfmt.com/2020/02/28/your-guide-to-chopins-etudes/

1792:

Schumann - Piano Quartet in E♭ major, movt I. (first subject)

1498:. Any bug reports about the extension should be filed there. 272: 2617:

Am I correct to assume it has to be removed there as well?

2942:

This is not how it works. The onus is on you to establish

2805:

I usually prefer book sources, but if a booklet meets the

2238:

Template:Did you know nominations/Piano Quartet (Schumann)

996:

Whoops I guess, wasn't aware of that. The first 60 pages (

2230:

in 1842 for piano and strings, was described by his wife

1653:

Thanks for bringing this up. I've changed the rationale.

1633: 1501:

This will likely be the last update sent to this list.

1429: 566:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 351: 2702:

Please provide evidence that Taiwan is not an island.

779:), and Part D is in F#-minor rather than A-major... -- 639:

Template:Did you know nominations/Septet (Saint-Saëns)

321:

Knowledge:Protection policy#Pending changes protection

2326:

and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the

1365:

Template:Did you know nominations/Erlkönig (Schubert)

2236: