Wikipedia

User talk:Voceditenore/Archive 23

< User talk:Voceditenore
Latest comment: 8 years ago by FoCuSandLeArN in topic Upon your return
Learn more about this page
    This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page.
    If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page



    AfC draft advice...


    Another one

    edit
    Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    For you, mate: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Carl Siegemund Schönebeck. And this one. That's why I'm telling you to check the 2000 submissions every week, haha! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:04, 24 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

    In your dreams, Focus :). Anyhow, Carl Siegemund Schönebeck has articles on both the German and Catalan Wikipedias [1], [2] and the refs check out, entry in a music encyclopedia [3] makes him notable. If moved into article space, however, it must have an attribution template on the talk page as this is a direct translation of the German Wikipedia article. It also needs a lot of superficial clean up, but nothing to keep it out of article space.
    On the other hand, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lear on the 2nd Floor is a non-starter. This opera has never had a professional performance, and in fact its sole performance was at UC San Diego a few months ago. Some of the information can be added to Anthony Davis (composer) (although not the blow by blow scene descriptions). If it ever gets a performance from a notable professional opera company with actual reviews in the press, and/or receives a multiply reviewed recording on a notable label, that will be the time to make a stand alone article. My feeling is the WP article is attempt to raise its profile and maybe get a professional performance. It's supposed to be the other way around. Kudos to the article's creator for being upfront about their COI, but this kind of says it all. Notable operas get articles pretty fast here and don't need the help of a paid editor. See also [4]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

    AfC submission

    edit
    Latest comment: 10 years ago140 comments2 people in discussion

    Hello Voce! This looks quite notable. Just giving you a heads-up. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

    Another one here. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:23, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! I moved the first one to Lawrence Golan (conductor) after doing considerable work on it. Interestingly, he was the plaintiff in Golan v. Holder. Otherwise, I might not have bothered. The second one was basically OK, although a little rough around the edges. I've moved it to Kerstin Avemo and strongly recommended to the creator that since he is autoconfirmed and has created several articles already, he shouldn't use AfC anymore. His answer was quite interesting: [5]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Reply
    That is interesting indeed! Thank you once again for your hard work. That's commonplace at AfC; some editors are actually quite good at what they do and continue using the process, which is good as they get to correct some aspects of their editing and learn useful Wikipedia tidbits along the way. It's nice to guide them through the extraAfC world when we figure out who they are. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I'd !vote delete at an AfD, and so would my colleagues, I'd wager. The "CV" is very puffed up/padded and has lots of pointless name-dropping, but does not conceal the fact that there is no recording career as a soloist, nor has he been Principal horn with a leading orchestra which could conceivably override the dearth of independent coverage. The sources are all primary and I can't find anything else. Left a note on the draft recommending that it not be accepted in its current state. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    You were quite right to decline it, FoCuS! I've left a further note on the draft to that effect and removed the most egregious copy-pasting, but there's still a lot of it. UGH! Voceditenore (talk) 18:33, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Nope! A non-starter. Left a note to that effect on the draft page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:15, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! Clearly notable and good references albeit many in print only. I've moved it to article space at Luigi Ceccarelli. I'll now start working backwards on the others. Voceditenore (talk) 09:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thank you for the effort! I thought of you while watching this gem. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! Well, that editor has been busy, hasn't he? Observe the original user name. Apart from 5 sentences about the female half of the piano duo, the entire article (text, discography, references, etc. has been pasted in from Andrey Kasparov, the other half. Duplication Detector. I'm afraid they only get to publicize their recordings once. In my view this draft should be created as a redirect to Kasparov's article with the lede in Kasparov's article edited to reflect that and a very brief section on the duo itself, no more. The Kasparov article also has numerous problems. How on earth the AfC reviewer who moved it to article space could rate that mess as "B" class is beyond me. I'm going to tag it for clean up and notify the Classical Music project to see if anyone wants to take the red pencil to it. I also left a lengthy comment on the draft with options. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    It was moved to mainspace? Oh my! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. The Invencia Piano Duo draft, hasn't been moved yet. Andrey Kasparov was moved to article space last year by an experienced editor [6]. I would have moved it too. It had enough there to pass notability and sufficient refs—it didn't need to be perfect. None of its flaws were fatal ones. But I certainly wouldn't have rated it "B" class. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Done. See Vladimir Conta. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Done. See Kendall Taylor. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks once more; your diligence is commendable. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Ah, FoCuS, a truly embarrassing moment for Wikipedia. :/ Thanks for letting me know about this one! A well-referenced article on a subject linked from Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics (a list of topics that can currently be found in modern music encyclopedias and are needed on Wikipedia). Rejected by the reviewer for lack of notability with completely false comment that there were only 2 "independent references" (there were 5) and the subject having only 1 major published work. Never mind that this treatise published in 1492 is considered a seminal work on music theory. Plus the multiple books and journal articles on his work which were all listed in the article in addition to the inline cites. I'm pretty sure that the article was written by a distinguished music professor to boot. Anyhow, it's now at Domingo Marcos Durán and I've written the creator a grovelling welcome and thank you note. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Move it to article space now and tag for clean-up of the ref formatting. I haven't got the time to do it at the moment, but none of its flaws are fatal. He's clearly notable. He has a 200 word entry in the The Grove Dictionary of American Music (2 ed.). See [7]. As a rule of thumb if a person has a dedicated entry in a notable encyclopedia or biographical dictionary (and Grove is very notable), they meet our criteria for inclusion. You might want to spread the word amongst your colleagues about that. Another thing they can do is click on the red link for the article and check if that page is linked to Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics. Example: Domènech Miguel Bernabé Terradellas. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Not ready for article space. She's reasonably notable via the productions she's appeared in (several of them in leading roles) and her discography, but the article is completely unusable in this state. It's referenced to his private communications with her (absolutely cannot be used, and everything referenced to that needs to be removed), a blog (only useful as an external link, not for referencing), ditto Operabase, plus various potted biographies on the websites of the theatres where's performed and Naxos Records—none of which are independent of the subject. The creator needs use reviews etc. in independent, non-self-published sources. These links provide a lot of material he can use [8], [9], [10]. Virtually all of them are in Italian. But he should be able to get the various gists with google translate. Voceditenore (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Not ready for article space. Reasonably notable, i.e. would scrape a pass at an AfD if a lot of other editors put in the work to "save" it. But the referencing makes this a non-starter at the moment. Two of the references are to books about the chap he studied under, which I suspect do not mention him at all and there are no page numbers or quotes. The third one is to the completely unreferenced Italian Wikipedia article it:Pier Paolo Pacini. There are references out there, but the creator needs to do the work. Voceditenore (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Not ready for article space, one potted biography from Malmo Opera House, and an article about a children's opera in which he created the title role where he is given a brief mention. So far, the career is not a particularly significant one. He'd need leading roles in several leading opera houses. Malmo Opera is not one of them and/or a discography of two recordings singing significant roles on notable labels. The AfC draft is simply a paraphrasing of this. He has an equally poor article on the Swedish Wikipedia sv:Samuel Jarrick, basically copied from this. Voceditenore (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Above are my latest verdicts. I don't think any of them would be loss to Wikipedia if they weren't created. Hence I'm not prepared to do anything to improve them, and neither should you. They're not hopeless, although in the case of Jarrick, it may be impossible to clearly establish notability, but the editors need to do a lot more work. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    I appreciate you help, as ever. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    One of the authors replied with a follow up on sourcing: User_talk:FoCuSandLeArN#Rejected biography of Alessandra Marianelli: a question about sources. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've added yet more to the conversation at your page today. More importantly, the creator of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alessandra Marianelli went ahead and submitted it for review again with no significant improvement in referencing, one sentence of text, and two lengthy tables with empty citations. What's the policy on removing those review-waiting templates? I was sorely tempted to. They are simply wasting the time of other reviewers and artificially lengthening the queue. Sigh. Voceditenore (talk) 15:41, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks again, Voce. Yes, that is commonplace, and several discussions tried to address that issue, the lastest being this one. The consensus seems to be nominating them for MfD after a considerable amount of submissions, but a flexible hand is allowed by fellow reviewers as a cost effective solution, i.e. removing the template until they either give up or substantially improve their drafts. We'll see what happens. Keep up the effort! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    OK FoCuS, I've been bold and removed the submission templates. I also restored the decline notice and your comment, both of which the draft's creator has removed. I left a comment on the draft about what I had done and explaining why. Hopefully the message will eventually get through. Voceditenore (talk) 09:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Looks like DGG is on it. The subject is a clearly notable historical figure. The referencing isn't fab, but it's plenty good enough. This is exactly the kind of draft that needs to move into article space so other editors can improve on it—Wikipedia's strength. That can't happen while drafts languish abandoned in a lonely workshop. Voceditenore (talk) 17:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Me again, FoCuS. That draft (or a duplicate) was already moved to article space last December, and by DGG. See Nikolai Petrovitch Troubetzkoy. Don't know what happened there. Voceditenore (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hm, I'm guessing DGG's merging the two, given the one at AfC is a bit longer and has more references. Thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:13, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Definitely notable, very eminent musicologist, has a 1158 word entry in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians: Eggebrecht, Hans Heinrich (2001) "Günther, Ursula". Here's a snippet that's available without subscription from the online version index:
    (b Hamburg, 15 June 1927; d Ahrensburg, 20 Nov 2006). German musicologist. She studied the piano and attended the Schule für Musik und Theater in Hamburg, where she qualified as a private music...
    The draft is pretty... er... rough, needs a lot of clean-up, copyediting and wikifying. It's looks like a not so good translation of the German Wikipedia article. They also have the wrong author for the Grove article. She did coin the term, Ars subtilior (See [11]).
    I'd accept it and tag it for clean-up. Voceditenore (talk) 19:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thank you for your valuable input, I did just that. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Hmmm. This is definitely a notable and useful topic. See the last paragraph of Jean-Joseph Mouret#Works here. But... the article is badly written, full of original research, seemingly based based on their interpretation of the music from watching YouTube + a bit of cribbing from here and the rest is unreferenced (but true-ish) facts about the historical background. If it went into article space now, it would be (rightly) festooned with multiple clean up tags and then hacked down to a quarter of its length. It looks like someone's class assignment. No comment on what grade I'd give it. The title is a mess too, but that can be fixed. What do you think? Depends on what's more discouraging to the fledgling editor, asking them to try a bit harder before acceptance or accepting it with the inevitable scenario I described. Voceditenore (talk) 17:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    I suppose I could give it a bit of a copy edit and ask for the author's help. I'd obviously have to leave a lot out, but it'd be better than no article at all. Let's see if I can get in touch with him/her. I could use a bit of help with referencing though. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    So I'll go ahead and do that. Would you mind glancing over it tomorrow and see how I did. I'd also need some references. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:41, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've added some refs and cats. I think you might as well move it. I suggest Suite of Symphonies for brass, strings and timpani No. 1 as the title. The classical music folks can always move it to something better. Voceditenore (talk) 11:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks Voce! What about this one?
    Me again, FoCuS. Aargh, I'd run across this independently and did a bit on it. I think you should accept it but tag it for copyediting. As for the title, that's what makes me say Aaargh. I haven't a clue. Maybe Cesar Franck sonata for piano and cello (Delsart)? Once it's in article space the CM folk can monkey with the title. Voceditenore (talk) 12:09, 25 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Ah, FoCuS, this one was easy. I wish they were all like that. I've moved to article space at Giovanna Sestini + a redirect from Joanna Stocqueler. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! . I almost missed this one. Yes, he's notable. He has an article in The Canadian Encyclopedia, among other things. I don't know what the link is doing in the external links section. It ought to be used in the references too. The other refs are OK too. The article is a bit..' er... rough around the edges, but I'd move it into article space and tag for copyediting, etc. He'd definitely survive an AfD. and probably as speedy keep. I'll be away for the next three weeks. Until then, all the best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thank you! Take care, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! This one already exists at Augustin Daly and has done since 2003. It appears the draft creator went ahead and added his material to the existing article a few weeks ago. Will try to get to your other ones shortly. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:28, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS, me again. Yes, would almost certainly pass AfD. I've added two more independent sources. When you move it to article space tag it for {{copyedit}}, {{citation style}}, and {{external links}}. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I wouldn't pass this, nor bother to work on it. No significant career as a concert pianist or recording artist, and as one source put it:
    Who is Tristan Lauber? That's the question Ottawa music lovers have been asking since the board of the Ottawa Chamber Music Society announced Friday that Lauber, a 38-year-old Montreal piano teacher, will complete the programming for this year's Ottawa International Chamber Music Festival....
    Half the references are are either to his own website (or similarly primary) and articles he's written. Most of the remaining ones are duplicate of him taking over the Ottawa festival programming in 2007. Voceditenore (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    I wouldn't pass this, nor bother to work on it. No significant career as an opera singer—a few roles in minor provincial companies, no notable recordings. The review is from a website that publishes reviews on request for $465 (!). Need I say more. Voceditenore (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    I wouldn't pass this mess, nor bother to work on it. However, it would probably scrape a pass at AfD if it's ever turned into anything resembling an encyclopedia article. I've left an extended comment on the draft page. Voceditenore (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    The subject has maybe a 50% chance of passing an AfD, although the current referencing is extremely poor. He's directed for a couple of reasonably notable, if not top-tier, opera companies, Opera Holland Park and the Scottish Opera touring company. Note that opera-britannia.com is an amateur website and this one is the official website of Opera Holland Park with cherry-picked review quotes, not the original reviews. They're not in the article at the moment, but reviews from multiple British newspapers for his productions are available. This strikes me as part of a concerted effort by 3 new SPA editors to promote a relatively new Bulgarian opera festival which "supports young opera singers", i.e. non-notable ones ;) by creating one for the company, and filling in the red links in the draft. See also Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Operosa and the recently created Darina Takova, a notable singer but a poor article, referenced solely to a blog review and... er... the Operosa website. Anyhow, tell the creator of the Martin Lloyd-Evans draft to get to work on producing a properly referenced draft with multiple reviews in mainline newspapers. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've cleaned this up (a lot!) and moved to article space myself. Passes MUSICBIO on the recordings. Clearly an autobio, however. I removed and/or copyedited a bunch of stuff. Best Voceditenore (talk) 07:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    This one's a bit tricky. The only way she would pass with the current referencing is WP:MUSICBIO #9 (Has won or placed in a major music competition). Some of her prizes are properly referenced, but I have no idea if those are major international competitions. Suggest you get a view from WikiProject Classical Music. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Scrapes a pass via WP:MUSICBIO#5 with the two recordings for Newport Classic. Dreadful article though. Tag it with {{copyedit}}, {{Blp refimprove}}, and {{external links}}. I haven't got the time now to take my mighty red pencil to it, but I'm sure others will once its in mainspace. Will try to get to the others in a couple of days. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Has entries in Women composers and songwriters: a concise biographical dictionary and Women in music: an encyclopedic biobibliography, Volume 2 and the ASCAP Biographical Dictionary of Composers, Authors and Publishers. More than a 50% chance of surviving an AfD, and unlikely it would be taken there (dead people rarely are). I cleaned it up a bit and added the authority control. I'd say accept and see what happens. Voceditenore (talk) 09:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've just removed 3/4 of the draft. It was verbatim and/or closely paraphrased from http://www.lucyparham.com/biography.htm (as if the horrific puffery weren't a clue in itself). I've left an extended comment on the draft. In the meantime, I recommend declining this. The referencing is completely inadequate for a BLP and for the claims made. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I'm travelling at the moment. Will get to these when I get back on the 27th. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! Well, he probably does scrape notability. But it needs a lot of work on copyediting and referencing. I'll get to it in the next couple of days, and then move it to article space.
    Yep, he's notable. I've cleaned it up rather a lot and moved to article space at Emil Simon. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS, me again. Hmmm. This is a toughie. I think it could eventually pass, but not now. The existing references are inadequate. I have found some reviews of one of the books, and may be able to some for the other ones. If I do, I'll add them and move it to article space. Maybe decline for now? But leave a note to the effect that I'll see what I can do with it over the next week or so. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    I've added independent sources, clearly passes now, and moved it to Dolores Claiborne (opera). I also removed the entire synopsis section, which was blatant copyvio. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks once more, Voce! If you want to mark the submissions as "under review" you can do so using the script. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:53, 27 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. The script simply will not work for me. That's why I manually move drafts that I accept. I can't decline them or mark them under review. Frankly, I don't care. The script is awfully inflexible and impersonal. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Go ahead and move Draft:Oksana Skorik (I've added some refs, removed dodgy BLP stuff, and copyedited for encyclopedic style. Draft:The Girl in White (Ballet) scrapes a pass too, but just barely. I'd say go a ahead and move it. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Me again, FoCuS. I see another reviewer quite rightly has declined it. Proper referencing would easily establish notability, but the creator needs to do some work here, and he's not important enough for me to do it. Voceditenore (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Yeah, he passes, despite the referencing being a mess here. I'd say go ahead and move it but remove all the references to Wikipedia articles first, and tag for clean up, especially the ref formatting. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    This passes too. Had a big review in Billboard (I've added it) + it's a work by two notable people. Note the wikilinks in the article probably go DaB pages so it needs to be tagged for that. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

    Cheers, Voce, here are a few more:

    Hi FoCuS. Already moved to article space by another editor. Frankly, this was very marginal and I wouldn't have approved it. Virtually all the references are simple concert announcements, press-release based, or written by the subject himself. He is not all notable as an opera singer and his roles are inflated, not sung in major opera houses in full-scale professional productions. Oh well. Voceditenore (talk) 16:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    We could nominate it for deletion. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:36, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Nah, FoCuS. Not worth the effort I'd have to put in to analyze all 47 references. He could well scrape a pass at AfD anyway (although not as an opera singer) simply because he and his agent have been very busy getting him interviews. Voceditenore (talk) 11:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Interesting case, FoCuS. A notable encyclopedic subject (with articles on both the German and Dutch Wikipedias) seemingly created by someone with the goal of publicising his own (non-notable) business which makes reproductions of Kaps pianos (see [12]). I've extensively edited this to remove the plugs for the creator's business, added some proper references, and copyedited for coherence, grammar, etc. Go ahead and accept, but tag with {{refimprove}} {{orphan}}, {{copyedit}}. It needs proper cats as well. When accepting, I suggest moving it to Ernst Kaps Piano Fabrik with an additional redirect from Ernst Kaps Pianos. When you've accepted it, I'll add some commentary on the talk page re the stuff I removed and why. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. You're right! Decline. None of the references indicate he passes WP:ANYBIO and he most certainly does not pass the alternative criteria at WP:MUSICBIO. He's at the very beginning of his career. He might become notable some day, but is not now. I'd advise the article's creator stop the attempt to create an article about him at this point. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I see this is already declined and rightly so. I'll leave some comments on the draft. Voceditenore (talk) 13:48, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Decline. Referencing is totally inadequate. He probably would pass the notability criteria if properly referenced to independent reliable sources. I've left extensive comments for the creator on the draft itself. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I see this is already declined by another editor and rightly so! No independent sources. Why? Because they basically hire themselves out to entertain at private events. The first version had been deleted as blatant copyvio from this. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Better than a 50% chance of surviving an AfD, despite the appallingly formatted and documented references. I'd say accept it, but remove the references to YouTube and Wikipedia and tag for clean up, especially {{citation style}}. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Decline. References are very weak - they simply verify the performances but I suspect she would pass an AfD on those. I also added a big-ish article on her in the Washington Blade and a ref for the Outer Critics Circle Award nomination. However, the material on her personal life and many of the quotes, do not meet the referencing standards for a BLP. The creator needs to put the work in. Voceditenore (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Decline. See my lengthy comment on the draft page re it needing to be checked for copyvio. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Decline. Completely lacking inline citations and all refs are to his official biographies, nothing independent of him. I have no idea what's available out there, but frankly, he isn't sufficiently notable that I'd put the time in trying to to find it. The draft's creator needs to to that. Tell 'em that independent sources in Arabic are OK, if it's too difficult to find significant coverage in English. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. It was but I archived it, as I thought you had seen it my May 16th answer, which still applies:
    This one's a bit tricky. The only way she would pass with the current referencing is WP:MUSICBIO #9 (Has won or placed in a major music competition). Some of her prizes are properly referenced, but I have no idea if those are major international competitions. Suggest you get a view from WikiProject Classical Music..
    This was their answer, which gives some useful links, although it doesn't address the issue of whether any of the awards/prizes are major ones. I'll ask 'em. The current sources are largely concert announcements and some reviews, all of her debut CD. (She'd need 2 recordings on a notable label to pass WP:MUSICBIO #5. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Oh I remember now! Yeah, left them a note already. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:38, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Me again, FoCuS. See the response to my query as to the notability of the competitions. This one really is a judgement call and frankly I'm neither for nor against acceptance. Voceditenore (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Already moved to article space and rightly so! Voceditenore (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. An absolute pig of a draft but passes Criteria 9 of WP:MUSICBIO. I've drastically pruned and re-written and move to article space at Mary-Jean O'Doherty. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Good luck! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2014 (UTC)*Draft:Dulce Beatriz. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've vastly truncated, copyedited, and referenced this. It was a complete dog's dinner created by an editor (editors?) with an obvious COI. I think she'd now scrape a pass at AfD. Go ahead and accept it. Note that you'll need a history merge as this was cut and pasted from the multiply declined Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dulce Beatriz (last declined 29 May 2013). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I see this was declined 2 days ago by another reviewer but it passes WP:MUSICBIO on the three recordings. I've added 4 more independent sources. You should move it into article space and tag for further clean up. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS, me again. A very prominent organist but a dog's dinner of a draft (an attempt to paste and translate fr:Pierre Pincemaille). Anyhow, I've fixed it up and referenced it. Go ahead and move to article space and tag with {{organist-stub}}. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:20, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Yeah, FoCuS, she's notable. I added an extra ref just to make sure. Go ahead and move it and tag with {{tone}} or {{copyedit}}. It's way too promotional and full of infelicities like "Maestra De León de Vega", "acclaimed", etc. It stands a much better chance of getting fixed once it's in article space. I did a quick check for copyvio, given the tone, but it seems OK. Looks like it was "custom written", if you know what I mean.Voceditenore (talk) 14:11, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks, Voce! Have you any comments on Cameo Classics? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:39, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    You're welcome, FoCuS :). Still thinking about the Cameo one. Oh and I've nominated all the images in Draft:Sonia Marie De León de Vega for speedy deletion. They're all copyvios. Voceditenore (talk) 14:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS, I moved this one into article space myself. Voceditenore (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Moved into article space by another AfC reviewer and rightly so. It'd pass an AfD. Voceditenore (talk) 14:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Decline, a non-notable former session musician turned non-notable drug counselor—not because of the references' format (easily fixable), but because of their quality. Not a single one of them covers the subject in any depth. Several don't mention him at all and the remainder are simple track credits and not very impressive ones either. Also, this is a BLP. Where did all that unpublished biographical information come from? Rhetorical question. We can't publish that. Especially problematic is the picture of his ex-wife and mention of their divorce which is entirely undocumented. Voceditenore (talk) 06:38, 30 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've fixed it up and cleaned it up a bit and added several more refs. Definitely notable, shouldn't really have been declined, but I can see the reviewer's point given the state it was in. Go ahead and move to article space where it can be further improved. Voceditenore (talk) 09:32, 30 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

    AfC submission

    edit
    Latest comment: 10 years ago13 comments2 people in discussion
    Hi FoCuS. After the recent decline, I had a look and added a couple of references (reviews of 2 of the albums they produced) but I still don't think it's enough. There may be more out there (probably requiring library work), but the creators are going to have to find it. It's not a sufficiently important label for me to spend time on it. It is mentioned in multiple WP articles [13], but it's hard to tell if that was just advance legwork from other COI editors. None of the mentions are referenced. Note that the creator of this draft has the same name as Cameo's distributor (Wyastone Estate) and has been very busy getting the Wyastone name into multiple articles [14], although sometimes reverted [15]. Voceditenore (talk) 06:38, 30 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I've vastly truncated this and rewritten with references. It was a blatant copyvio from here, hence the wildly unsuitable tone. My view is that with the new references, this probably does pass WP:MUSICBIO criteria 5 and 8. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. UGH! Needs to be cut to 4 sentences—literally. He is mentioned in a few sources in India but only concert announcements basically and in one review of a performance by an artist whom he accompanied. He's also appeared as the accompanist on several recordings, but I'm not sure how notable they are, and frankly don't care enough to find out. Maybe ask at WikiProject India? This is quite different from Draft:Subhen Chatterjee, which I think you should move to article space. See my comments above. I'll try to get to the rest of the folks above sometime next week. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I haven't forgotten about you. I've just been horribly busy. I'm leaving for Italy, away for a month. I'll take at look at these when I get back. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

    Alea III

    edit
    Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Dear Voceditenore: I found an old draft about this organization, and looked up some references before realizing that it was a copy-paste remnant. I deleted the draft, but are any of these useful in improving the mainspace article? —Anne Delong (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

    • http://greece.greekreporter.com/2011/07/16/greek-composer-in-final-6-of-the-%C2%AB2011-alea-iii-international-composition-competition%C2%BB/
    • http://azerbaijanamericaalliance.org/news/azerbaijani-composer-qualifies-for-alea-iii-competition-final-in-us
    • http://www.ecu.edu/cs-admin/news/poe/1005/horst.cfm
    • Music at Michigan. UM Libraries. 1979. pp. 20–. UOM:39015009459036.
    • Chime: Newsletter of the European Foundation for Chinese Music Research. European Foundation for Chinese Music Research. 1993.
    • Pan Pipes of Sigma Alpha Iota Quarterly. Wayside Press. 1980.
    • Charles Christopher Mark's Arts Reporting Service. Arts Reporting Service. 1987.
    • The Instrumentalist. Instrumentalist Co. 1988.
    • Journal of the American Viola Society. American Viola Society. 1985.

    Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Maxim Rysanov

    edit
    Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

    Dear Voceditenore: I notice that you started to work on this article a few months ago. Are you planning to continue with it? —Anne Delong (talk) 10:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

    Hi Anne. I'm in Italy for the next month with poor internet access, so can't work on it 'til I get back, but it's worth keeping and getting into shape. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Hi Anne. Me again. I see it's now in article space, thanks to your hard work. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:15, 12 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

    another one for when you get back

    edit
    Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hakon Jarl . DGG ( talk ) 04:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

    Hi DGG. Done! See Hakon Jarl (Smetana). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:42, 12 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

    Just accepted

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

    Edwin R. Fissinger. It needs some clean-up, doesn't it? Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Hi FoCuS! Edwin R. Fissinger is basically OK. I fixed all the references to him as "Dr. Fissinger". The other issues are relatively minor, not worth a festoonment of banners.
    As for Draft:Ingrid James, she may be borderline notable in Australian jazz circles. I have no idea—it's not my area. But it's up to the creator of that fluff to reference it properly with independent sources. As of now there are zero. I wouldn't waste any time on it, frankly.
    And apropos Draft:Ambre McLean. You're right about the chart listing. That needs a rock solid source for the chart position. It's the only potentially viable claim to notability. Not to mention the "award-winning" description. A local contest for "emerging artists" hardly justifies that claim. I assume you've also noticed the... er.. parallels between the draft's creator and the name of her latest record company. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks for all that. Yeah, Ambre's creator just posted a message on my talk page claiming she charted on some fringe publication. I think I'll decline it. Did you like my Honey and Rue? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. Me again. Honey and Rue is looking good. Well done for filling a gap here. I've done a wee bit of tweaking, mostly MOS stuff. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
    I'm more than happy to oblige. Let me know if I can help you with any more "gaps". I quite enjoy doing the research for music-related projects. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS. I need to look more closely at McWilliams. However, Lynn Freeman Olson is definitely notable. I've formatted the sources with links and added authority control. I'd say to sprinkle the sources around the article as inline refs and accept it. Voceditenore (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Sure thing! Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Ballet

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago14 comments2 people in discussion

    Draft:Radu Poklitaru looks like it could use salvaging. I could definitely clean it up if you would help me confirm his notability. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:48, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Draft:Ernest Element & Element Quartet? Is Element Quartet iself notable? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! Element Quartet is mildly notable. The problem with musicians and ensembles that were prominent in the UK in the 1950s is that there is a dearth of material online. Referencing can be done, but it's a lot of work. I'll see what I can do with referencing that one. As to Ernest Element himself, he seems reasonably notable. He's got an entry in British Music (published in 1948 and only available in snippet form on Google [16]): "ELEMENT, ERNEST. Violinist, b. Wolverhampton, Staffs, January 5th, 1909. Studied under Hytch, thereafter placing himself with Paul Beard, Henry Holst and Carl Flesch for successive periods...". But Draft:Ernest Element & Element Quartet needs to be drastically cut. The amount of quoted copyright material is completely unacceptable. The book about Robert Simpson used as a reference for the quartet premiering his works is probably accurate, but it's self published (Xlibris). More about the ballet chap in a mo'. Voceditenore (talk) 06:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS, me again. Re Draft:Radu Poklitaru, yep, he's notable. See [17] and definitely worth salvaging. There's even an image of him on Commons: File:Radupoklitaru.jpg. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks, Voce! Radu Poklitaru now on mainspace; Ernest Element's submission has been cleaned up by me just now. Do you reckon it's ready for moving, albeit with appropriate tagging? Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Just accepted Flute Concerto N°1 (Jolivet), Pastorales de Nöel, Chant de Linos and Bassoon Concerto (Jolivet), is that OK? What about Draft:Martin Lodge (composer)? Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Also, this opera looks notable. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! Yes, those Jolivet compositions were fine. I've created Category:Compositions by André Jolivet for them. The opera is very notable. I've added more refs and moved it into article space. Will have a look at Draft:Martin Lodge (composer) in a mo'. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Me again, Hi FoCuS. Hmmmm. Martin Lodge is marginally notable, albeit in the very small pond of New Zealand composers. Gets a mention in The Oxford history of New Zealand music. There is other commentary on his music in places, e.g.
    "Pacific Rock, for solo viola by Martin Lodge, with its busy, brawny perpetual mobile gestures interlarded with sliding figures, clearly demonstrates the influence of Watson's composition [...] (21st Century Music, Volume 9).
    The draft is dreadful though, written like a résumé/press release. And, unreferenced BLP-violating trivia must go, e.g.
    "Lodge lives on a lifestyle block outside of Hamilton with his wife, noted writer Gail Pittway. They have two children, Alexandra and Max" .
    The creator clearly knows the subject personally (possibly one of his students?) and it shows in the text. I'd reject it until they provide proper and extensive referencing, not just one review of one album, and remove all peacockery and all claims and assertions (especially evaluative ones) which cannot be reliably sourced. It's not a subject I'm interested in working on. Unless you are, put the ball back in the creator's court. PS This is a very frank and probably undiplomatic assessment. Don't link to it directly when communicating with the editor. PPS What the heck is a " lifestyle block"??? Voceditenore (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Ooops. Forgot to answer about Draft:Ernest Element & Element Quartet. Yeah, go ahead and move it to Ernest Element suitably tagged. It would survive an AfD now. Voceditenore (talk) 12:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Thanks, Voce! I've moved Ernest's article just now, and will decline Lodge's. Apparently a lifestyle block is a hobby farm in NZ...who would've known? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:24, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Wow! A "lifestyle block" is a hobby farm, eh? What a curious expression for it. I learn something every day  . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Indeed! What do you think about Draft:Phyllis Gummer? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Deleted for flaming copyvio. Voceditenore (talk) 17:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Have you seen this one?

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Draft:Operosa. Might be notable in Serbia, but I can't find much about it. What do you think? Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Hi FoCuS! I see another reviewer moved it to article space yesterday, and probably rightly so from looking at the refs. I've been aware of that draft for over a year but had been studiously ignoring it because of the obvious COI shenanigans which came to head two months ago. I give such drafts my very lowest priority unless another AfC explicitly asks my advice. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Might pass

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

    Notability, but needs references, don't you think? Draft:Adrian Borza (composer). Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Wow, FoCuS! This one's a pain to search for, given the football player of the same name and from the same town and the fact that he's not awfully well known outside Romania. However, this article in the Ziarul Financiar seems to confirm the George Enescu Prize for his composition (If for oboe and electronic media). He got another, lesser prize for the same work, see here. Apart from that I couldn't find much biographical info, although there seem to be mentions of him in various concerts in Romania (all in Romanian and I haven't looked at the contents closely). There is a mention of him in this book (Art music in the Balkans). Might be enough, especially the Enescu Prize. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2015
    Thank you for your comments FoCuSandLeArN and Voceditenore. Searching the net, I have found some biographical information about him on the Contemporary Romanian Musicians site (English). There is also a Wikipedia page in German about him. I might add, he has an articles citations page on Google Scholar, he got a mention of his work Dusk in this article published by the International Journal of Music. A list of compositions can be found on the Musicalics website. Best, Smorfe (talk) 15:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi Smorfe. I was referring above to biographical information that is completely independent of the subject. The bio on Contemporary Romanian Musicians site is not independent. It can be used to reference biographical information in the draft but is not useful for establishing notability (the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia). However, as I told FoCuSandLeArN, I think the subject's notability is probably established by having won the Enescu Prize. The German Wikipedia article is referenced solely to the subject's official website, and in any case Wikipedia cannot be used to reference itself. I notice that your user name is the same as the subject's website (smorfe.com). If you have any affiliation to Adrian Borza, personal or professional, you need to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for guidance when editing under those circumstances. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:48, 31 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

    New one

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

    Draft:Herbert Sucoff. Besides the NYT obit, the only 2 considerable mentions are this and [18]. And Draft:Charles-Victor Dubois? What do you reckon? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:07, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Hi FoCuS! Sorry about the late reply. I see that another reviewer moved Draft:Charles-Victor Dubois to article space and rightly so, in my view. Draft:Herbert Sucoff is tricky. The notability here is pretty marginal. The obit is a case where I think the NYT is acting in its capacity as the "local newspaper" for the NYC area. No other obituaries appear elsewhere in the US. I checked WorldCat and his published music is held in a miniscule number of libraries. I think the only way this would be sure to pass an AfD, is if the article could establish that the ensemble he founded was notable, i.e. Sea Cliff Chamber Players, with reasonable coverage and preferably documentation of them premiering notable(ish) works by other composers, not just his own. The evidence for the claim "His compositions have been performed in prominent concert halls, largely in the New York area but also outside the United States", is not independently verifiable from the reference given (print copy of what appear to be liner notes but not online.) If they are liner notes, the claims are not independent of the subject. Hope that helps. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Me again, FoCuS. I've also placed a version of these comments re Sucoff on the draft itself as guidance—primarily for the creator, but also for reviewers. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Thank you once more, Voce! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    You're welcome, FoCuS  . Frankly, if I were you I'd review it and fail it. It would at least cut the queue by one and I honestly don't think it passes in the current state. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Done.   FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Maltese

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago11 comments2 people in discussion

    Hey there, Voce, how are you? Just wanted to confirm Draft:Peter Paul Ciantar and Draft:Harmen Vanhoorne are non-notable. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:07, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Also, is Draft:Acoustics of the violin worth working on or should it just be TNT'd? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:58, 12 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! The violin one is a complete non-starter. It's a how-to/essay/OR/buyer's guide, with dubious uncheckable refs and more importantly, any information worth salvaging is almost certainly included already in Violin, Violin construction and mechanics, and String instrument#Sound production. I'll get to your other two chaps later today. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks, Voce. What about this singer? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! Yes, he (Draft:Manfred Hemm) is definitely notable. Lots of performances in leading roles in leading opera houses, and the reviews to prove it. He also created the title role in Gottfried von Einem's opera Der Tulifant. Plus a discography that would let him pass on WP:MUSICBIO alone. Not that it adds to his notability, but he used to be married to this lady. Dreadful draft though. Needs cleanup and much better referencing. Shall I put out a call for help at WikiProject Opera? I might be able to get to it myself in a few days if no one else does. Still thinking about the maltesers. Voceditenore (talk) 15:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Sure, let's get it up to appropriate standards. Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    OK, FoCuS, now for the Maltese and the Belgian. Draft:Peter Paul Ciantar is dreadful. I hate "hails from" and the listing of his hobbies, but he may well be notable in... er... Malta. It all depends on that first reference which rather fudges the issue. If he actually has an entry in Dictionary of Maltese Biographies, he might scrape a pass. I haven't got a clue.
    The Belgian (Draft:Harmen Vanhoorne) may be kind of well-known among ...er... cornettists. But there really isn't much about him at all, apart from having won these brass band contests and only one recording on a Belgian label which I've never heard of. But it's probably worth keeping this around for a while in case something else shows up.
    Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

    More

    edit
    Latest comment: 9 years ago17 comments2 people in discussion

    What better way to forget about Italy than reviewing? Ha ha!

    Non-notable local orchestra. Not worth even trying to rescue. Voceditenore (talk) 17:29, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Another non-notable local orchestra. Not worth even trying to rescue. Voceditenore (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Yes, this one probably scrapes notability, but needs a massive clean up, and should have a couple more independent sources to be on the safe side. Voceditenore (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Closed as "Keep" and rightly so. Voceditenore (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Closed as "Delete" and rightly so. Voceditenore (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hmmm. I see this was accepted at AfC. Probably the right decision, but it needs a lot of copyediting. The creator seems to be an admirer rather than a COI editor, but the article comes across as very promotional even if that wasn't the intention. Voceditenore (talk) 17:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Accepted at AfC and rightly so, but this needs a HUGE amount of copyediting. Well, that's it for today, FoCuS, more tomorrow. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:57, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Did you say that in a Donald Trump voice? Ha ha! Thank you! FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 18:14, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Hi FoCuS! The Agim Hushi article is dreadful, but I suspect he's notable and it could be "proved" if one looked hard enough for citations. I'd leave it for now. When I get back from Italy in September, I'll see about de-pufferizing and referencing it. I suspect by the time I'm finished... the article will be a stub that's shorter than its reference section.
    Draft:Elin Soderstrom miiight eventually scrape a notability pass. But it would be a ton of work finding adequate references and the current state of the draft is somewhat akin to a pig pen. This is one of those cases where, unless you are personally interested in putting in a lot of work for very little encyclopedic value, it's better to leave the ball in the draft creator's court. I note that she almost certainly has a conflict of interest. Observe the "role reversal" with the creator of Mary Soderstrom (another very problematic article).
    I see that On Site Opera was accepted and probably rightly so. As for the interesting discussion, I tend to avoid those like the plague. They make my brain hurt  . I'm off to Italy next week—a part of deepest, darkest Tuscany with not fab internet connection—and staying a month. Yay! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Oh, how I envy you! Have the best time possible, and no Wiki-peeking! Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Tranche 1

    edit
    Latest comment: 8 years ago17 comments2 people in discussion
    He could probably make it. I've added a couple of refs to it. Voceditenore (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

    Hi FoCuS! I'm starting on these with the oldest first. Will try to get to the rest of this tranche in a couple of days. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

    Me again, FoCuS! I've finished this tranche. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

    Tranche 2

    edit
    Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments1 person in discussion

    Upon your return

    edit
    Latest comment: 8 years ago41 comments2 people in discussion

    Tranche 3

    edit

    Tranche 4

    edit

    Tranche 5

    edit

    On another note, can't believe Piano Concerto No. 1 (Chopin) is such a poor article, considering it's one of the most played romantic pieces of all time. I'll see if I can do something about that. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 18:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

    Add topic
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Voceditenore/Archive_23&oldid=843758171"