User talk:Knavesdied
Welcome
[edit]
|
Woodblock print
[edit]Hello, will get that image of the Otto Müller woodblock print to you on wikicommons. watch this space :) - Noelypole (talk) 15:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! I can then add it to Woodcut#Colour Knavesdied (talk)
- I've added it to the article. The image unfortunately has reflection from the perspex covering. It also looks a bit darker than I thought, but it was the best I could do with photoshop, feel free to edit the image if you like. Noelypole (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps you don't understand how the German umlaut works. "Mueller" and "Müller" are exactly the same, and used indifferently. See here. Johnbod (talk) 09:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Johnbod, I think I understand how the German umlaut works in English. It's more that the English sources for the title of this work refer to it as Portrait of Otto Müller so I've just standardised the naming of the artwork to that used in the published and verifiable sources. But if you wikilink to Otto Müller Wikipedia requires disambiguation so, to avoid the need for disambiguation, I've used the wikilink of Otto Müller. Hope that all is reasonable? Knavesdied (talk) 09:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well sort of. But if Müller redirects, Mueller must too, as these are not different spellings. Personally I think the artist is primary, but I can't be bothered to do anything about it. Johnbod (talk) 10:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Johnbod, I think I understand how the German umlaut works in English. It's more that the English sources for the title of this work refer to it as Portrait of Otto Müller so I've just standardised the naming of the artwork to that used in the published and verifiable sources. But if you wikilink to Otto Müller Wikipedia requires disambiguation so, to avoid the need for disambiguation, I've used the wikilink of Otto Müller. Hope that all is reasonable? Knavesdied (talk) 09:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps you don't understand how the German umlaut works. "Mueller" and "Müller" are exactly the same, and used indifferently. See here. Johnbod (talk) 09:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've added it to the article. The image unfortunately has reflection from the perspex covering. It also looks a bit darker than I thought, but it was the best I could do with photoshop, feel free to edit the image if you like. Noelypole (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Estill Voice Training article
[edit]Yeah, that's kind of an edge case. My problems with the article are the sections "Estill Certification Programme" and especially "Influence, Adoption and Application", which sound spammy to me. Also "You can listen to Jo Estill present on this topic in a recording of Jo Estill at YouTube" isn't very encyclopedic-sounding; I'd just make that link a reference.—Chowbok ☠ 11:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks for the advice. So what's the protocol here? If I make some changes and let you know, and then you'd remove the advert template if you're happy. Or do I remove the advert template when I make my edits and you put it back on if you still feel it's still got problems? Knavesdied (talk) 12:24, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, go ahead and remove it once you think it no longer applies. It can always be re-added if necessary.—Chowbok ☠ 12:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- I've reworked the "Estill Certification Programme" section and removed the "You can listen to…" wording keeping the material just in the references. Are these edits heading in the right direction? Not quite sure what to do with the "Influence, Adoption and Application" section with the list of examples. I think it's important to include referenced material on the different fields this voice training technique has been used in. Any suggestions on how I should present this? Many thanks for your help! Knavesdied (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Knavesdied. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Knavesdied. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Estill voice training logo.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Estill voice training logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
