User talk:Ipigott/Archive 2

Art and culture of Denmark

I would by all means like to assist with the arts and culture articles to the best of my ability. My interest in culture and art is quite broad, the reason that I have focussed on architecture is that its integration with the ohysical environment makes it very "visible" and articles on architecture double as geography articles so to speak (and with so many articles that need to be written, two in one seems a good deal to me). Due to their visibility, articles on architecture/buildings are also a great "gateways" to both history and art in my opinion. Therefore such articles just seemed a good place to start – and prioritizing have seemed very necessary with the overwhealming need for articles within Wikiproject Denmark and the very limited number of people taking an interest. But I would certainly like to participate more within those two fields. I actually wrote you a note on the talk page of Art of Denmark a while back with a useful link and an offer to participate but those talk pages are so easily missed (if you don't expect something to be there) that I should have done it another way, I just haven't got around to it since there has been so many other things to write about. I will have a look at the two main articles and if there are other more specifik areas you are interested in just say so. The Golden Age sounds good to me but so does most other topics, I just like to concentrate on specific areas since I find it more rewarding to write articles if there are other comprehensive articles to tie them up with.Ramblersen (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Danish vintage photographs

I agree with you that it is surprisingly difficult to find early Danish photographs online. There are some landscape photographs by German-Danish Wilhelm Dreesen but they will generally be from localities now located in Germany. Elfelt's [File:Efter Kapsejladsen by Elfelt.jpg After the boat race] might be a candidate. Some other early stereoscopic photographs can be found here but they are not all by authors dead more than 70 years ago. Are there any photographers you are particularly interested in finding pictures from? Then I could make an inguiry at the Royal Library if everything else fails.Ramblersen (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

It is difficult but I am now beginning to find a few. Unfortunately the Danish digital collections all pretend they have copyright on vintage photos although both EU and US regulations allow free copying if the author has been dead for more that 70 years. I have used this explanation in my uploads. Hope no one complains. Ipigott (talk) 17:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

A small thing in relation to Jacob Aue Sobol in your Photography in Denmark article. It was not for his documentary Rejsen that he won a World Press Photo Award but a photo series taken the year after when he returned to Guatamala. I don't think you can win that award for documentary films so a precision may be desirable Ramblersen (talk) 13:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've corrected this with the correct reference. I think the wrong info came from PhotoMondo. One of the problems is that Sobol has the wrong date in his own cv. It should be 2005. I'm glad to see you have started to write an article on Sobol. I must say the biographies on Danish photographers in both the English and Danish Wikipedias need lots of work. And by the way, I have found quite a few good sources for vintage photographs, for example from Flikr Commons, from the Royal Library. It's a start! Ipigott (talk) 14:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

A non-Danish photographer

-- and one of disputed worth. Might I ask you to put Zoriah Miller‎ on your watchlist?

"But he's of no interest to me!"

Excellent, just as I hoped. I think that a fight might break out (see the recent history); if it does, then a few more dispassionate pairs of eyeballs might help. -- Hoary (talk) 11:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

As you say, not really of any interest to me. But as you drew my attention to it, I've had a look. Some of the sources cited may well be driven by Zoriah Miller (or Zoriah as he seems to call himself now) but given the large number of newspaper articles, hits on search engines and even on blogs, I don't think this person can really be ignored.

And I see he won yet another award just last week from what seems to me to be a completely independent source.

So what the article really needs is a bit more basic research, some additional content and a good copy editor. Ipigott (talk) 17:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

You may well be right. It's hard for me not to infer that the participation one recent and vigorous editor was fueled by an intense dislike of Miller, a state of affairs that's not conducive to a good article. But I think he's got the message that denunciation is not a way to achieve deletion. I'd point out, though, that a great many of the hits that Miller gets seem to be derivative bloggery, or mirrors. Most of it is the same old stuff. -- Hoary (talk) 13:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your continuing patience and sanity over there. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Danes

You say, inter alia:

Krass Clement (b. 1946) [. . .] has since become one of Denmark's most outstanding documentary photographers, [. . .] Jacob Aue Sobol (b. 1976) [. . .] His stunning book Sabine. . . .

We need sources for the claims such as "outstanding" and "stunning'. And if we find that, say, Gerry Badger (still redlinked, tsk tsk) said both, it's not enough to source them both to him; as he's only one voice. Rather, we'd have to say something along the lines of:

Krass Clement (b. 1946) [. . .] has since become a documentary photographer Gerry Badger has called "outstanding", [. . .] Jacob Aue Sobol (b. 1976) [. . .] His book Sabine, which Badger calls "stunning", . . .

because of course half the books in existence have blurbs that traffic in this sort of adjective, and if we called "outstanding" everybody who's verifiably been called "outstanding" then half our biographees would be outstanding.

Ah, Krass Clement is the photographer of Drum. I've never seen a copy and I've always wanted to. It's not a rare book but it's an expensive one. If you happen to have a spare copy, send it my way! -- Hoary (talk) 13:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Appreciate your comments. The lazy habit of cutting and pasting leads to this kind of effusiveness! It obviously should be avoided. I'll look into it. Have you also seen my comments regarding references on the Photography in Denmark talk page? And what about submitting Photography in Denmark to DYK? If you think it's a candidate, please go ahead.

I am now in the process of writing articles on some of the key Danish photographers. This should ultimately help with the whole business of referencing. Ipigott (talk) 14:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Danish photography

Thanks for your numerous English-language contributions on Danish subjects. Your article on Danish photography is very good and adequate and my only suggestion is to include perhaps some more of the pioneering female photographers like da:Mary Steen, da:Julie Laurberg, or da:Bodil Hauschildt (who became the first female royal photographer in Denmark, followed by Laurberg a few years later). da:Hansen, Schou & Weller and da:Sophus Juncker-Jensen (more info is needed on him) are interesting as well. There's also a strong tradition of architectural photography going back to da:Christian Elling and continued today by da:Jens Lindhe and da:Roberto Fortuna. I am, however, no expert on the subject and has not consulted relevant literature to the extent that you have. You can find the articles created so far in the corresponding Danish category.--Urbandweller (talk) 03:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

"History of photography" category

You'll see that in my tweaking of "Krass Clement" I removed Category:History of photography. This isn't because I don't think he merits a place in the history of photography. On the contrary, I'm sure that he does. I'm sure that dozens, no, hundreds, no, thousands of photographers do. I don't think for a moment that Glen E. Friedman or Rodney Lough, Jr. do, but clearly their proponents (Rodney Lough, Jr. notable among them) do, and I don't relish the thought of multiple arguments about this. All in all I think it's better not to mark the bio of any photographer (no, not even Nicéphore Niépce) with this category. -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Roger. I'll remove the others on biographies. It may still be a good idea to include History of photography under See also in some of them. Ipigott (talk) 08:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Jacob Holdt

I noticed that you are giving the Jacob Holdt article a make over and I don't know if you are aware of this, nor if it is too gossipy to include, but there seems to be some king of liaison between Jacob Holdt and Saphire of Precious-fame which it may or may not be worth mentioning. Well here is the source.Ramblersen (talk) 12:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I'm sure there must be lots of similar anecdotes about Holdt but this one is certainly timely. The piece in Politiken also served as a good reference for the Ku Klux Klan story. Ipigott (talk) 13:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

St. Alban's Church, Copenhagen

In case you continue your much appreciated practice of giving my new articles a copy-edit, I think St. Alban's Church, Copenhagen's section on architecture could use a few lines on the floor plan, interoir etc and what makes it typically English, I'm just really bad at explaining that kind of things in a fairly readable English. So if you would consider adding a bit there it would be great - and if you are too busy elsewhere I'm sure it will be fine as it is. And another thing: The church's [ http://www.st-albans.dk/about-us/about-the-church/ website] states that Cnut the Great moved the remains of Saint Alban to the Church of St Mary at Odense. This in not mentioned in the article on Saint Alban, rather contradicted. I haven't looked too much into it but most of the hits I seem to get is to Danish sites. Is it something you have an opinion about?Ramblersen (talk) 16:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

If you would like to write a rough account of the floor plan, I would be happy to tidy it up. There are many legends about St Alban and his relics. I would be surprised if there is any physical evidence about them being brought to Odense. What is certain is that St Alban's is a common name for English churches. No one would doubt that St Alban's in Copenhagen is an English church. Ipigott (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Another photographer for you (or not)

I don't remember if Jens Olof Lasthein is a Swede who happened to be born in Denmark, or a Dane who became a Swede. Anyway, he's not easily labeled Danish, sorry. Still, what I've seen of his work is extremely good. -- Hoary (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for this. A very interesting photographer. There seem to be conflicting accounts of whether he is Danish or Swedish - but I would opt for Swedish. Certainly worth an article. And while we're in touch, as I think I have pretty well completed the essentials in Photography in Denmark, I was wondering whether you think it would be worthwhile submitting it for GA. I know it probably means quite a bit of additional work but it would at least increase interest in the article. Ipigott (talk) 07:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've now put something together about him. Unfortunately I have not been able to find any really independent reviews. I also see there is very little about Swedish photography on Wikipedia. In order to prevent the orphan tag appearing, I had to add him to the Artist section of List of Swedes. Ipigott (talk) 12:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Whew, you're fast. I still haven't started articles that I've been intermittently thinking about for over a year. ¶ GA? Experiences like this and this tend to give me a very dim view of it, but it would be good to have some more good "Good" photography articles; I could then start to forget about bad/depressing "Good" ones. Over the next few days, I hope to go through it. I suggest holding off a little with nomination. -- Hoary (talk) 13:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

There's certainly no rush on this. I suppose the first step will in any case be to find someone prepared to upgrade it to B. What I'm really worried about is the images. There are quite a number of image fanatics out there who think only they have the solution (and the different solutions they have really are different). I went through it all with Architecture of Denmark, running up well over 250 edits at the time! And it all started when I suggested aiming for GA on the article's talk page - as I have with Photography in Denmark. But no reactions there yet. Ipigott (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh of course it's B. I'm afraid I haven't yet given the licensing of the images any consideration whatever; other things first. Um, right now I am concentrating on an attempt to understand Swedish; please excuse me for a few minutes. -- Hoary (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC) .... I'm back. As happens far too often when I get interested in a photographer, I want to see more. I already knew that Lasthein's Moments in Between was in one or other volume of Parr 'n' Badger (the Midas brothers), but a bit of googling revealed that it was unavailable from the world's best loved online monopolist (no surprise), cost a lot via abebooks.com, but was available from Swedish dealers at a very reasonable price. So I've just got myself a copy from Bokus.com. It's a bizarre process, as they kindly provide an excellent list of translations, but this skips such vital info as the meanings of "Avbryt" and "Bekräfta beställning". Since the former was short and simple I guessed it meant "yes" or "go", but this told me it meant "abort". I clicked on the other one, which I hope means "buy" but perhaps means "empty entire bank account" or "release wife to slave trade". A bit scary. I've ordered books fron France in French, but from Iceland and Greece in English. -- Hoary (talk) 15:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Bekräfta means confirm, in other words buy. Make sure you order the English edition, there's also a Swedish one with no translation. On Photography in Denmark, it wasn't the licencing they were bothered about, it was the imaging positioning, sizing, consistency and caption linking! -- Ipigott (talk) 15:18, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I've already ordered the book, which I think is bilingual and the sole edition so far. Black Sea, White Sea exists in two versions. Yes. images are a pain. Soon, soon. -- Hoary (talk) 15:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Recent developments

Sorry if I always seem to be pouring cold water on your efforts, which are prodigious, but I don't think that most articles need a "recent developments" section (an exception would be an article on a subject that a reasonable person might wrongly assume was all settled, e.g. the border between two nations long at peace); I suspect that the FAC people won't like it; and I'm even underwhelmed by its content on its own terms.

I'm really busy for the next couple of days; thereafter I hope to contribute rather than merely carp. -- Hoary (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Your advice is always welcome and invariably useful. The Recent developments section does of course provide a very convenient, quick-and-dirty way of adding interesting (at least for me) content which should of course ultimately become part of the main article. I believe it also attracts further interest. Adding a couple of lines there is much easier than incorporating a new item in the body of the article. Nevertheless, I will try to follow up on your advice and either delete some of the stuff or work it into the appropriate section of the article. I've actually been wondering whether there should not be separate subsections under Contemporary photographers on art photographers, press photographers, court photographers???, etc. Then there might also be a need for a section on photo firms or agencies (cf Architecture of Denmark where user Ramblersen has done a good job on architectural firms). I'm beginning to discover quite a number of really good, award-winning press photographers and am busy writing up their stories on separate pages. No need to make excuses about being busy. I've all the time in the world and am always amazed at how much you get through each day - I've looked at your long contribs lists too. Ipigott (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

You'll see I've cleaned it up now. -- Ipigott (talk) 17:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

"History" for GA?

In belated response to your request on its talk page:

Yes, I'll help.

However, the article must first be perfect in the highly critical eyes of those who already know it. It isn't so yet. Consider two adjacent footnotes (with emphasis added):

• 8. "Danmark - Fotografi". Den store Danske. (in Danish) Retrieved 28 January 2010.
• 9. "Anton Melbye". From Den store Danske. (in Danish) Retrieved 6 February 2010.

"From", or not? It's OK either way, of course. (My own preference would be without, as the "from" is inferrable. But really, I don't mind.)

And should "Den store Danske" be in italics? (I think it may be but -- because it's not a printed source -- needn't be.)

If this sort of thing isn't made uniform -- if the total doesn't look perfect -- then the lack of uniformity/perfection allows a newcomer to suggest that the whole lot should use citation templates. These are bulky and inflexible (I almost never use them myself), converting to them takes a long time (and would be one effort to which I would not contribute) and they leave the "source" a mishmash that's much harder to read and work with.

I've been going through the footnotes for precision and informativeness, but I haven't gone through all of them yet. When I've finished, I'll read the article -- it's a long time since I've done that. There'll probably be a lot more work to do, not least because I'm a compulsive fiddler.

(Why all the attention to trivia? For one thing, because the trivia is easier for me to attend to when I'm in a hurry. For another, because GA reviewers can themselves be clueless about what's far more important than such trivia as the uniformity of use/nonuse of "from".)

I'm replying here rather than on the talk page as somebody who saw it on the latter might, if particularly ill-tempered, interpret it as an attempt to conspire to avoid the templates that "the Wikipedia community" has been determined to be appropriate blah blah blah. And (ahem) you may wish to render this message even less conspicuous. -- Hoary (talk) 00:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I really appreciate all the trouble you are taking with this. I must say, though, you are very sceptical about the good faith of your fellow Wikipedians. If all they are concerned about is adding or deleting prepositions in references, then I doubt whether their opinions should be taken very seriously. Anyway, it is of course great to have everything just perfect in the references. I am actually far more concerned about the coverage of the article, in other words whether all the key developments and people have been included, and in the prose which always seems to be an issue. If we actually submit the thing for GA assessment, I am ready for lots of surprises. It'll be really interesting to see they all come up with. Ipigott (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh no, I think they're acting in good faith. It's other aspects of their personalities that tend to worry me. ("I've no idea what all this stuff is about so I think I'll check whether the authors have deployed hyphens, en dashes and em dashes appropriately.")

As for content, which does matter, I'm hobbled by ignorance of Danish photography. I don't think I possess a single book, even though (just among those I can immediately think of) I have two of Finnish, four of Estonian, and four of Lithuanian. I need to visit a Danish bookshop selling photo books (like I need a hole in the head, the missus would add, pointing to the piles of photobooks on the floor). -- Hoary (talk) 16:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The only good book I could find on the subject is Dansk Fotografihistorie, but of course it is in Danish, as would be most of the other books you would find in a Danish bookshop. If you really want to research the subject in detail, why not use your local library. Japan has ILL (Inter-Library Loan) agreements with the rest of the world. -- Ipigott (talk) 11:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

There is also the excellent site you had difficulties in accessing and asked me to delete as a reference. It's here. If you still have difficulties, please let me know and I'll send you the text. Ipigott (talk) 12:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandkunsten

Elekhh has dropped us a joint note on my talk page that he has expanded the Vandkunsten stub and nominated it for Did You Know. Well see for yourself, I just wanted to make sure that you didn't miss it. Talking of Danish architecture, today it will be published that schmidt hammer lassen has won the competition for the design of the International Criminal Court – quite an impressive win which it is probably worth updating Architecture of Denmark with when sources start to appear!Ramblersen (talk) 05:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Elekhh has certainly made a good start on this. Good to see he's still in the loop. As for the International Criminal Court, there's already a good reference here. Ipigott (talk) 14:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Danish jazz

The day before yesterday I created the article on Danish jazz we had talked about and began working a bit on the subject because I had understood that you were going to have a go with classical music. But now I see on a talk page that you were actually going to start working on Danish jazz. So I just wanted to say that if yoy are still interested in starting there, I will happily work on something else instead (and then of course follow the article on jazz and contribute to the best of my ability and work on some related articles). I think the subject is well suited for good and fairly comprehensive coverage so I would hate keeping you from embarking on it with your usual thouroughness.Ramblersen (talk) 08:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Glad to see you've already started working on this. You are quite right about Music of Denmark: there is still a lot of work needed there. So if you like, I will continue to work on that for the time being but will always be around to help you with Danish jazz. Just let me know if ever you need any help. For a start, there is obviously a great need for references. I've also noticed that most of the biographies on Danish jazz musicians are really dreadful - so there's lots of work needed there too. Ipigott (talk) 10:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Well it entirely depends on your preferences. If you are interested in participating more actively on Danish jazz, I certainly think it would be great and that the topic deserves it. In that case I think the best result will be reached if you are the main writer on the Danish jazz article and maybe a few of the more important biographies while I concentrate on making articles and sourcing and expanding existing stubs on smoewhat less important musicians and topics (and I promise to be very active in this so that a good coverage can be reached without you having to write a hundred articles as you did in photography). If you prefer to stick to Music of Denmark and classical music right now, your copy-edits and general guidance will also be a big help but then I should probably go straight for the most important articles since I am not likely to get much further that to finding references for and expanding the jazz section from Music of Denmark a bit and improving the articles on a handful of the most important Danish jazz musicians with my slow speed. What I find important is that to the extent you are involved, wheather it is a lot or a little, that your time and skills are spent on the most central parts since that will obviously safeguard the best quality of the final result. And considering the importance of the subject, I think it would be great if the main article was written in proper English and not my primitive one (even if cleaned for the worst errors and atrocities). Ramblersen (talk) 17:52, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure we can find a sensible working relationship on all this. May I suggest the following: I'll try to bring the whole Music of Denmark article up to at least a C standard of quality. This will entail quite a bit of work on all the items covered, including jazz, and on some that have not yet been included until now. Your offer to work on the jazz biographies and other related articles would be very useful. I don't know if you found this article I mentioned before which I though could be a useful starting point for jazz references. And there is of course a short but well drafted section at the um.dk site here. I'm sure there are many more refs in Danish but I always try to use English sources if they exist for the EN WP.

I am also rather busy with all kinds of other things at the moment and so I may not be able to devote as much time to WP over the next month as I did in January and February. But I will try to make some reasonable progress. -- Ipigott (talk) 19:43, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Celtic Luxembourg

For me these two terms are almost synonymous. If the name Celtic Luxembourg conforms better with the idea of your article, I'd agree if you rename it back. --Dmitri Lytov (talk) 12:33, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Ready. It's simple, just press the Move button above the article (instead of Edit). --Dmitri Lytov (talk) 14:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

just one photo

Try this when you have a spare ten minutes. -- Hoary (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for sending me this. Strange story, sad ending. But it also brings back personal memories. You might be interested to know I was at Rossall School, one of those British public schools which had very strange and special traditions. I may say that it has now changed beyond recognition. I was also a member of the school's photo club and spent many happy hours in the darkroom, frigging around with black-and-white enlargements. One of them was even published in the French newspaper Le Figaro. I pretended it was a shot of the moon over the beach and sea. The moon was actually a sixpence carefully placed on the printing paper! That must have been back in 1959. In those days photography was really fun. -- Ipigott (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Hah, talk of peripheral vision and priming effects. I read "...public schools which had very strange and special traditions" and "frigging" appeared peripherally, but as "flogging"! Your school sounds better than mine, which I loathed. It was hundreds of years old (I mean, even when I was there), and the headmaster would witter away about how old it was, sport, Jesus and the "CCF". I had no interest whatever in any of these. (If he hadn't kept banging away about its age, that might have interested me.) I see that it has its own article here, and sure enough going from there to its website shows lots of young chaps enthusiastically doing things with balls. And they're still wearing uniform too. However, I don't see see any signs of "Faith" (as I believe it's called these days), webbing or blanco. Who knows, a century from now they might even knock off the sport and let girls into the place. -- Hoary (talk) 15:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Architecture of Luxembourg

On March 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Architecture of Luxembourg, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 04:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

full bodies

Psst, there's an unanswered question about "full body size enlargements" on the talk page of the Danish photography article. You might wish to look into it before the GA reviewer does. -- Hoary (talk) 14:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Photography in Denmark

The nightmare has begun. Get cracking! -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your alert. And thanks too for making a start on some on the comments. I'm a bit pressed for time today but will see how things go. The most difficult comment to deal with is "There is no underlying theme, apart from the Danish connection. I am not getting any real feel for the subject. There is little about the development of the photography industry in Denmark, apart from its beginnings." The article is not about the photography industry but about photography as a means of expression. It is of course true that Agfa Gevaert had a factory there for a number of years but it was only one of many. I think I'll have to explain this. -- Ipigott (talk) 09:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I found some time this evening to follow up on most of the other comments. Your feedback on my changes would, as always, be appreciated. -- Ipigott (talk) 20:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Long time overdue...

I must admit I have never paid much attention to the more esoteric parts of Wiki culture and find these barnstars a bit silly. But your contributions to WikiProject Denmark certainly deserves all the recognition it can get and you have earned this one long ago so for what it's worth:

		The Danish Barnstar of National Merit
		For your tremendous contribution to the coverage of Danish culture and art on Wikipedia Ramblersen (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
		this WikiAward was given to Ipigott by Ramblersen (talk) on 14:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Very glad to have received this on my 67th birthday. -- Ipigott (talk) 16:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Haha excellent timing then and (a bit late) happy birthsday! Well I just saw that Photography of Denmark has already become a good article and wanted say congratulations with that as well. I haven't been following the process too closely lately but it seems to have gone very fast and smoothly this time, I guess you know the ropes by now.Ramblersen (talk) 22:11, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it went very smoothly this time, thanks to the involvement of User:Hoary ever since I started to work on the article. If you think the number of GAs helps with WP Denmark, then I might also submit Art of Denmark to the GA review process. What do you think? -- Ipigott (talk) 09:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Cite news

Hi! Regarding this edit, it's still news even though it's present on the web. So I changed back to "Cite news". Geschichte (talk) 20:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Good. I'm not too familiar myself with the various cite templates and tried to implement the one which seemed most suitable - especially as someone's first attempt to make a link to the online source seemed to fail. But obviously your solution is the best one. -- Ipigott (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Østermarie

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Always nice to see self made work, photos too. I've just made a map of Bornholm. What I can do is add a window locator of Bornholm in Denmark in the corner so we can use one map. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 09:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that might be a good idea. Bornholm comes out so small on the map of Denmark that you can hardly see one place from another. Thanks for the box too. BTW, I am very impressed with the number and quality of your contributions to WP. I believe you have created more articles than anyone else. I tried to find out exactly how many but the tool failed to complete! Perhaps you can give me the correct figure yourself. I thought we had lost you at one stage when you "retired" as Himalayan Explorer. Glad to see you back in your new incarnation. - Ipigott (talk) 09:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Ah, well I've been Blofeld for a long time. Actually partly the reason why I started editing as Himalayan Explorer was that a lot of people were moaning about the quality of my contributions! At times this site can get unbearable, but I'm happy enough on here at the moment. I'm a Brit too!

Ah there you go check out Rønne now. That's better... Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 11:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I've begun expanding Rønne. If its OK by you, once developed a bit more by yourself and I, I'd like to nominate it for a joint DYK. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 21:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

You've managed to do in about an hour and a half everything I intended to do over the next few days - great! There are perhaps still a few details to be added, especially on points of interest which I would be happy to contribute. But by all means go ahead with DYK now - the additions will be in before the DYK appears. I'm glad to see that little Bornholm is finally gaining WP prominence. By the way, I see you have also added a box on Svaneke. Are you sure, you have included the right seal? It looks to me as if it belongs to Nexø. The Svaneke seal is still in the article as "Coat of Arms". - Ipigott (talk) 07:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Rønne

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

List of Danish islands

Inspired by your continuous efforts to upgrade the articles of some of the more interesting Danish islands, I have been fiddling with a table to replace the rather incomplete existing List of islands of Denmark. I have ended up settling on a list of the hundred largest Danish islands, supplemented with a list of smaller populated islands (there will only be a few). That should just about cover all islands of any prominence and highlight which islands might in time warrant an article. However, I may well have forgotten some since it has turned out to be surprisingly hard to locate any good lists online (part of my motivation for making it), and it is not always easy to establish if an area has official island status either. So if you have anything to add or correct, feel free to do so – also if you have some suggestions in terms of layout. Right now you sacn find it in this sandbow where it will probably remain a bit longer until U have checked the numbers an extra time.Ramblersen (talk) 08:14, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've been following with interest the progress you have been making here. One immediate suggestion is Lindholm which has been in the news recently because they want to close the research facility there. I'll come back with further comments later. - Ipigott (talk) 08:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this and contributing with so many useful suggestions and additions.Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I am a little concerned about "Danish South Sea". This is not a term I am familiar with and as there is no WP article about it, it is even more difficult to understand. There is an area of the Baltic known as [Arkona Basin] but this is by no means a familiar term either. Perhaps the easiest solution would be to stick to SW Baltic? See also the Baltic Sea article, especially the section on subdivisions. - Ipigott (talk) 08:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I was certainly in doubt as to the appropriate way to refer to these islands. If you click any of the red links you will see that it leads to the Danish South Sea Islands and not the the Danish South Sea and corresponds to the well-established Danish tern "Sydhavsøerne" which has a Danish wikipedia page and plenty of possible sources. The page could also be used for wikilinking to Lolland-Falster collectively which I have sometimes wanted to do in various articles but been uncertain about how to do. The article would of course stress that it is a colloquial name for Lolland, Falster and Møn as well as the numerous surrounding smaller islands. Another—probably better—possibility is to refer to the untranslated Danish term Sydhavsøerne instead of postulating an English term which you are of course right is far from commonly used. A third posibility is to refer to more specific waters such as Guldborgsund and Nakskov Fjord but I wanted to use relatively few localities (possibly with more specific ones added in brackets afterwards) to allow for the automatic rearranger function of the table to sort out the islands in meaningful and fairly large groups to give the best overview. SW Baltic Sea which you propose is also an option but I think Sydhavsøerne is a term so abundantly used in Danish that it deserves a page.Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I see that you have used Gyldendal as a source for population data. Danmarks Statistik has a good page on the populations of the islands here. (You can get to the list by inserting Lindholm in the search box.) You will see that some of the variations are appreciable, e.g. Lolland with 65,764 vs. 68,750; and Zealand 2,164,217 vs. 2,130,541. I assume, in any case, that Danmarks Statistik is the official source. Perhaps their list also contains islands you would like to include. Hope all this does not entail too much updating work! - Ipigott (talk) 09:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes old Gyldendal numbers are certainly not a good source for populations. I only intended it to be the sources used for now and wanted sources which could both be used for areas and populations and found it easiest to use Gyldendal all the way through not to end up looking at a host sources for each and every little island with dramatically varying figures and each and every time spending lots of times a frustrations considering which one to choose. Danmarks Statistik is of course (and I should probably for the same reason have gone for it right away) but seemed more time-consuming plus it has the disadvantage that it is not possible to link directly to the result of the individual population searches. I did intend in the end to replace the population figures with the latest figures from Danmarks statistik and then to move the Gyldendal references to the area coloumn. Another thing I kind of liked about the Gyldendal references were that they could also provide some basic information about the island in question and not just the figures and thus be easily used for checking out the islands and possibly making stubs or short articles for some of them. So a sort of temporary all-in-one sollution until I knew exactly which islands would be there in the end.Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I see Store Okseø has a population of 3. - Ipigott (talk) 09:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Albuen, though unpopulated, might also be worthwhile including. - Ipigott (talk) 09:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I though it was most correctly considered part of Lolland but maybe you are right that it is officially an island. Sources seem to differ on this issue.Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

You'll see I've been doing quite a bit of work on your list today. I don't want to be too demanding but I wondered whether it would be a good idea to include coordinates. There are lists of these such as the one here.

Coordinates would be fine. I have not much experience with them myslf and wonder wheather it will have practical adventages to include them here or if it is enough to have them in the individual articles. But it may well be a good idea, I'll trust your discretion and will happily do the practical work if you think they should be there.Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I have also been wondering whether it might not be useful to specify the island group each one belongs to. Danmarks Statistik uses this approach, as do others. But these are things that could be dealt with in the future if you think it worthwhile.

I am not sure how many islands belong to "groups" per se and tried to obtain something similar with the references to which waters they are located in (for instance that notorious Danish south Sea term). In cases where there is an obvious group such as Ertholmene I think the best sollution may be simply to include it after the name: "Christiansø, Ertholmene" instead of simply "Christiansø". I do not think it is worthwhile to add an extra coloumn if it will only be used for a minority of islands. But I have myself considered a 'Notes" voloumn which could be used for various specifications such as 'Private', 'Listed', 'Artificial* etc, what do you think?Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

If I were you I would immediately put the list up on WP where others will also be in a position to make comments, additions or corrections. Thanks for all the effort you have been making on this. - Ipigott (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I thought it might be best to have decided on a fairly final form before moving it to avoid that different people start to pull in different directions. But with the usual level of interest on Denmark-related articles I guess noone will even notice it is there so I guess there may not be anything to worry about.;) I will move it very soon.Ramblersen (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your reactions. If you like, I can continue adding the populations from Danmarks Statistik but I could also do this once you have moved the article to WP. I see you have also a page on the lakes now. Well done! - Ipigott (talk) 06:31, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

By NO meas spend your valuable time on rinsering those Gyldendal references. They were merly an intermediate work tool while I was trying to find out what to do with that table and should not be there in the end at any event. I wasmerely rambling about my reasons for going for such lousy references for now. And I feal bad enough as it is about all the work you have ended up putting into something I should have done myself from the beginning. But it has certainly improved it a lot which is much appreciated. The reason for the dublicates may be that I have also kept finding dublicate entries or mistakes myself and by accident deleted islands alreadu entered. It just never seems to stop so it is really good with an extra set of eyes. But forget all about those Gyldendal links!Ramblersen (talk) 15:02, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

OK - but I'll fix the multiple Dankarks Statistik refs - then I think you can move it to the main WP.

Oh I have moved it...at least I think I have. But we can just move the one from the sandbox again, >I don't think I have done changes after I moved it and I doubt others have either. And please let me take care of the thing with the multiple references, no need for you to spend your time on something like that, it is much better used at more qualified work - or something else. If you haven't done it already, that is.Ramblersen (talk) 15:32, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

No. I'll leave it to you. Thanks. - Ipigott (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

List of lakes of Denmark

See you're doing bridges now too. In regard to lakes, I wondered whether lagoons and fjords should be included too - and if not, where else? - Ipigott (talk) 15:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Mu immediate feeling is that fjords are something quite different but I guess a seperate list could be made. As you are probably aware of, the lakes on the list with the suffic -fjord are in fact true lakes and not fjords in spite of their names. I think it is best to use freshwater as the criteria and there may well be a grey zone then – or rather a brackish one – but I don't know how many headaches it will cause in practice. To be honest I haven't been giving it much thought but just copied a list from Danish wikipedia for now.

I removed one of the Eskilsø entries but fail to see that Hirsholm is also listed twice. Are you thinking of Græsholm, Hirsholmene? Girsholm is an individual islands in the group Hirsholmene while Græsholm is another and larger one. I wrote Hirsholmene after Græsholm bevause there are other Græsholm's around although the other one (part of Ertholmene) has by now been pushed out of the list.Ramblersen (talk) 16:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

The problem here is that both are linked to the same site. And even Danmarks Statistik treats them together. Perhaps a note or an explanation at the bottom of the list would sort things out. But I'll leave it up to you. Thanks for incorporating my latest edits in the main WP article. On lakes, it seems to me there is a need for non-Danes to have some way of identifying inland waters which are not lakes. - Ipigott (talk) 18:23, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

As you have probably noticed, I have created a template for Danish islands. I do realize that I employ the Sydhavsøerne term once again that you are not in favour of. But it can very easily be adjusted, depending on the grouping we ultimately opt for. But to defend the term onc again, it holds the adventage of grouping together all the islands "south of Zealand" which in many ways are related geographically, culturally and historically. If instead we use Smålandsfarvandet, islands such as Tærø, Nyord, the islands of Guldborgsund or NakskovFjord won't fit into that category. And I don think it is correct to refer to (some of) them as islands of the Baltic Sea either since they are small coastal islands typically in destinct waters (fjords or straits). Therefore the popular term "Sydhavsøerne" serves a practical purpose - and gives a good overview. Just like the South Funen Archipelago. Within each group of the template, I have listed the islands according to size, I think that gives the best overview. If you have any comments to grouping, layout or order, just say so and I'll fix it. It is just a rough first version.

As for which islands to include on the list, I tried to write a mail to a "naturvejleder" on Læsø and received this rather contradictory and useless reply: "Prøv at spørge teknisk forvaltning om arealet, som ændres hele tiden (stiger). De er en del af Læsø. Jeg har hørt at Hornfiskrøn skulle være landets største øde ø – men ikke fra pålidelig kilde!". Does that mean that she thinks Hornfiskrøn is or is not an island? Well to me it seems a quite destinct island, judging from maps, but since it is the fastest rising land in Denmark, I guess it will in time grow together with Læsø. So I think the easiest sollution is just to ignore them unless somethings comes up with another view and a source (which I doubt). I have also written one of the authors of the locator maps on wikipedia commons to hear if he would consider making some more or if he could give me a hint as how to make them myselves. Hope I will have more luck there!

Regarding the questions/suggestions I wrote under Miscellaneous (regarding St. Agnes' Priory, Gavnø and cycling) a while ago, can I assume that it is fine with you that I make some changes accordingly or did you just forget about them?

Ramblersen (talk) 09:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Great to see how you are working your way though the red links on the list of Danish islands, I have myself been distracted from that project since I stumbled over a lot of available architecture photos on Flicker which I have been busy uploading and trying to put to use. And to sort out Danish categories on wikipedia commons which are such a mess!

comcerning the article on St. Agnes' Priory, Gavnø, I was wondering if it might be better to make it into an article called Gavnø Castle with St. Agnes' Priory as a subsection of the History section. Afterall Gavnø Castle is what is there today and the current Gavnø article could be kept for the island. Although the castle totally dominates the island, I think such a structure would be more logical and the grounds of the Gavnø estate far exceeds the island itself. And to have an article both on the castle, the island and the priory may be a bit of an overkil. It can be done very easily since it is basically a move and rearranging the sections.

Regarding Copenhagen City Bikes, I haven't much to add but wondered if it might be worth mentioning the Danish EXPO 2010 pavilion since it has the city bikes and Copenhagen bicycle culture as one of its central features. There are also a couple of photos available on wikipedia commons with the city bikes in Shanghai. Might be worth adding one of those for variation, there are not that many photos to pick from as it is. If you think it is worth adding, just tell me if you will do it yourself or if I should give it a go.

As for the article on cycling in Copenhagen, I am a bit sceptical of the section called "Similar initiatives". It hasn't really anything to do with Copenhagen and is without references. If the point is that they draw directly on inspiration from Copenhagen, it requires some references but in that case there is already a section called "Influence". What do you think?

In the same article, I have been considering making a section on "bicycle monumens", combing sculptures (such as this one and there is at least one new one too), internet blocks, the EXPO 2010 pavilion and the general tendency to make cycling and cycling infrastructure into a landmark/brand of the city. But I'm not sure if it would work as an independent section. Any thoughts?

Lastly, I have made an article on Bjørn Nørgaard's Bispebjerg Bakke housing project which you earlier haveshown a bit of interest in (I think you origianlly mentioned it in the Architecture of Denmark article). Somebodu has tagged the article for lacking notability so you might be interested in commenting on that aspect. Of course with whatever opinion you have ion that matter. Ramblersen (talk) 10:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Fænø

Oh and I see you have reached Fænø. I don't know if you are aware of [http://www.berlingske.dk/navne/livet-er-jo-her-og-nu-giv-det-et-loeft THIS} article or find anything in it relevant to mention. It is btw schmidt hammer lassen who has designed his modern interpretation of a manor house, might also be worth mentioning.Ramblersen (talk) 10:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Just as you were writing your message, I was looking into this and have just updated the article. But I will look into your Berlingske article too. Thanks for your continued interest. - Ipigott (talk) 10:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Somebody who doesn't much interest you (continued)

A teapotty tempest again swirls around this fellow. Keep an eye on his AfD, if you would. -- Hoary (talk) 09:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Hoary. Good to see you're still around. I don't feel like taking part in the Zoriah story any more but I would draw your attention to his latest interview where not all his remarks are so stupid. Perhaps the problem is that he puts himself forward as a photographer. If he had simply been a journalist there might have been less of a problem. But these remarks are strictly for you. Let's see what everyone else has to say about deleting the article. Keep in touch. - Ipigott (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm puzzled by your comments. I know little about Miller -- certainly I'd never heard of him till I encountered the WP article on him -- but those photographs of his that I've seen (eg in the article to which you link) have been fine and I haven't read any stupid comments by him. The passions for and against claims of his significance are what baffle me. Incidentally, I'd agree with a claim that it's hard to find good material about present-day photojournalists or news photographers or whatever you care to call them: Aside from a minuscule number of stars (Salgado, Nachtwey, and, um, that's about it) whose work is exhibited and whose books are actually noticed by more than a small number of people, they are uncelebrated. The infotainment-consuming masses are much less interested in photos than in videos, while those interested in photography go for the pretty, the obvious, the gimmicky, and of course Art (all of which have recently been sent up in a book by André S. Solidor). Anyway, people who view Miller's oeuvre dispassionately are particularly welcome at the AfD. -- Hoary (talk) 00:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I had not heard about him either until you drew my attention to the article. What I really meant by saying that his comments were not so stupid was that unlike the impression given by some of his critics, his own explanations seemed rather sensible. You are certainly right about the difficulty in finding good sources and pictures about modern photographers - so it is hardly surprising that there is not much on ZM either. The page view stats on him are quite high though, averaging some 500 a month, so there seems to be real interest in him from some quarters. Anyway, I had another look at the article and then called for Keep on the AfD. - Ipigott (talk) 09:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, got it. I'm sorry about my earlier misreading of the "not so stupid" remark. ¶ What concerns me is that somewhere almost lost amid all the armwaving and mouth-frothing, the nominator and his Thai and French IP numbers may indeed have a point: the blogosphere and elsewhere seem an echo-chamber of claims for him, claims that seem to be barely substantiated if they're substantiated at all. Which periodical has included his work? Which museum has exhibited it? Now, this doesn't have to appear online; it could instead be in a dead-trees publication. But which and where? -- Hoary (talk) 11:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Some questions

I have a few comments and questions for you but to avoid drowning your talk page I have dropped them in this sandbox. It includes two quotes which I would like to have translated into proper English but it is in no way important so you can just look at it when you have the time - or not at all if you don't want to bother with it.Ramblersen (talk) 06:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping in touch. You'll find more detailed answers in your Sandbox7. Let me know if you need more help. - Ipigott (talk) 12:31, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I love your translations, particularly the Holberg one, much nicer that the Danish version. English is such a beautefil language. And I am looking forward to seeing the Skagen articles evolve.Ramblersen (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

No need for a new headline since it concerns pretty much the same: As you have probably seen, I have been working on an article on Dankvart Dreyer in this sandbox. Once again there is a quote I wondered if you would translate for me (In "Early life and education"). If you have other (copy) edits, to add, you are of course more than welcome to make them but otherwise I think I will just upload it the way it is. I have particularly had difficulties with the last part concerning how his style differed from the norms at the time, it is terribly clumsy. So any improvements will be great. And this can of course just wait until you have the time, no hurry at all.Ramblersen (talk) 03:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC) I do not want to seem impatient – because I am really not – but I am in doubt wheather I may have made you miss this question on your talk page by posing two questions on your talk page fairly shortly after eachother with one of them an addition to an already existing section? I tried to make note of it in the following section but I am affraid it did not come out very clear. If you have just not had the time to look at it yet, do by all means take your time.Ramblersen (talk) 02:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I have now translated your quote in Sanbox3. - Ipigott (talk) 16:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Images - Skagen Painters

I have been trying to upload some of the Skagen Painters works to wikipedia commons lately. I stumbled over this blog but I am not sure if the pictures are of excellent quality or if they are too manipulated/colour enhanced.. What do you think? Oh and please note that I added a question to the end of the previous section a bit earlier - just so that you don't miss it now that I have added a new section.Ramblersen (talk) 07:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

This is indeed an interesting site. In fact I came across it myself and I believe I downloaded at least one of the images. If you click on the images, they come up with a higher resolution which makes them more suitable copying onto Commons for WP. Some of them seem to have been manipulated but others look pretty authentic. BTW, the paintings all seem to be by Krøyer. Some of them could usefully be added to the Peder Severin Krøyer article or to the Gallery there. - Ipigott (talk) 09:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC) Yes I always try to find the version with the best resolution when I uoload pictures - that was what I fell for with this site. But the colour enhancement made me unsure - they should still look like paintings. And for some pictures, I think it is worthwhile uploading better versions even if they are already found on commons. There are a lot of bad scans around. And the old versions can just be nominated for deletion.Ramblersen (talk) 10:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC) One of the problems is that many of the best versions of Danish paintings are not digitized very well on the web. It is sometimes better to scan images from prints in art books. And Danish sites ALWAYS tell you they are copyright! - Ipigott (talk) 14:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Another wacky Dane

Hello Ipigott. I (hesitantly) recommend the work of Asger Carlsen for your bemusement. Some of it is, I suppose, "NSFW", or anyway is not "family" material -- though it's about as unerotic as it gets. Google doesn't yet offer much that could be called "RS" on his work; so don't worry, if you find yourself curiously fascinated by it you have a fine excuse not to devote an evening to writing it up. If I were American, I might end "Enjoy!" (a command that I find alarming and disturbing). -- Hoary (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Good to see you're still around, Hoary. "Wacky" does indeed seem an appropriate way of describing Asger Carlsen. Not sure if I really like his work though. But it's certainly something that gets your attention. Has he actually won any awards? And is there a term to describe photographers who adapt their images so much that artificial alterations and additions become the new focus? If you ever write an article on him for WP, let me know. - Ipigott (talk) 15:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I haven't read that he's won any awards, no. He seems to have had a reasonable number of little shows, but I haven't seen any of these written up. Now that his first book has come out from a fashionable little publisher and has (I infer from Amazon) already sold out, perhaps there'll be more chitchat about him.

I'm interested in the way that in his series "Wrong" he has employed two tendencies to amusing effect -- tendencies that, used singly, almost invariably lead to results that bore me. One is the bogus snapshot of the faked serendipitous scene (Crewdson etc) and the other is immaculately done darkroom trickery (Uelsmann etc). Carlsen seems to have chucked a bit of Weegee and a bit of Krims into the mixture and the result, however corny, is much more fun than the work of his solemnly collected and exhibited predecessors. -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've included a snippet on him in Photography in Denmark. And Carlsen does indeed seem to have done a bit of work for Esquire, etc. See here and here. - Ipigott (talk) 08:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Well done! Even if, um, he's not actually in Denmark. ¶ The only work by Sobol I've seen is what he did in Japan. Well, he clearly admires Moriyama. But I can't see any reason for excitement -- yet he's a Magnum nominee. Very baffling. -- Hoary (talk) 08:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Danish Golden Age

Hi Ipigott. I should have checked this before, but the article is slightly below the 5x expansion to qualify for DYK (currently 4.66x expansion), which means it needs another 1,300 characters (ca.2-3 paragraphs). I think it would be particularly worth expanding the legacies of Hans Christian Andersen and Søren Kierkegaard, but I will not have time today. I separated the sculpture section as it appeared strange to me to be grouped with painting. Maybe philosophy could also become a main section. For the DYK image I think one of the nice paintings might be more successful in attracting readers, maybe File:Louis gurlitt møns klint.jpg or File:C W Eckersberg 1841 - Kvinde foran et spejl.jpg. --Elekhh (talk) 09:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm currently preparing a section on background which should do the trick. Yes, either of the paintings you mention would be more attractive. Tend to agree with you on sculpture. Thanks for your interest. - Ipigott (talk) 10:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I think the article is already long enough for DYK. When I have a bit more time, I may also add something at the end about international interest in the period. - Ipigott (talk) 12:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is, and here is the DYK nomination. --Elekhh (talk) 12:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for you help. Quick work! And I see Geothermal in Indonesia is coming along well too. - Ipigott (talk) 13:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know how I managed to drift so far away from my expertise... happy you came along with art :) And thanks for your hints. --Elekhh (talk) 13:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, variety is the spice of life! And I'm interested in renewable energy too, even if I haven't done much with it on Wikipedia. Your revamped portal looks really good. See you've been doing lots of stuff on the national parks of Indonesia too. Bye for now. - Ipigott (talk) 14:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Danish Golden Age

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott! Indeed the image must have helped to pass the 5K views thresshold, as otherwise art doesn't seem that popular ;(. I added it to DYKSTATS. Cheers, --Elekhh (talk) 01:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Correction

Thanks for the compliment. Sometimes it is not easy because the meanings of words change depending on the context of the sentence. You should also pay attention to texts written in Old English, when the handwriting was different. Not recommend to rely entirely spelling corrections to these bots because there may be more errors than corrections at the end of work. Good job, --Eumolpo (talk) 06:27, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Yet another Danish photographer

Hi Ipigott, da:Pietro Boyesen might be of interest to you and your excellent work in the field of Danish photography. Best regards,--Urbandweller (talk) 09:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I see this is a brand new Danish article - and that a few more photos have just been loaded up onto Commons here and that there are many more interesting ones here. I'm rather busy with a number of other things at the moment but I'll try to put something together within the next couple of weeks. He certainly deserves a page in the English WP. Cheers - Ipigott (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

As you may have seen, I've now written a short article on Pietro Boyesen. Thanks again for your interest. If you come across any more potential additions, please let me know. - Ipigott (talk) 08:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. --Urbandweller (talk) 19:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Place d'Armes (Luxembourg)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Pros and cons of adding 1,000,000 articles to the list

I've opened a discussion to discuss the merits and flaws of reporting French and German Wikipedias as having one million articles.

See Talk:Main Page#Proposal: Add million-article level to Wikipedia Languages section.

The Transhumanist    05:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Kristen Feilberg

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of International Veteran Cycling Association

The article International Veteran Cycling Association has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
International Veteran Cycling Association – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 07:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Rødkilde Højskole

The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ipigott, you can still check the number of views on the old page history (which is now a redirect). The article got 4K views which is pretty good. Seems that your hooks are pretty successful! --Elekhh (talk) 08:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I suddenly realised I could check it out that way - then I saw your message. - Ipigott (talk) 10:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Banner WikiProject Denmark

Hi, I have noticed that you have created a few new articles on compositions by Carl Nielsen. However, I don't think every article on a composition by a Danish composer should have the WikiProject Denmark on the talk page. If you compare e.g. with Edvard Grieg, only the article on the composer himself has the WikiProject Sweden banner, not the separate articles on his compositions. Just a thought. --Francesco Malipiero (talk) 15:58, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Francesco. And thanks for your contributions to these articles. There is a very simple reason why I include them in WP Denmark. There are a few Danes who look at the new articles and make their own contributions, including illustrations which I warmly welcome. This has already paid dividends, so I think I'll continue for the time being. - Ipigott (talk) 16:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Quintet

Thank you for the Nielsen quintet. I wonder if I should adopt your phrasing or, more correctly, the Quintet ... to Piccolo Quintet, but think, it's correct or it's not correct. Quintett für Piccoloflöte ..., that would be correct for the Waterhouse piece, even more complicated. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:35, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello Gerda. Thanks for your interest. Well, it's not exactly "my phrasing". The "authentic" Carl Nielsen Edition entitles Opus 43 "Quintet for Flute, Oboe, Clarinet, French Horn and Bassoon" (Danish: Kvintet for Fløjte, Obo, Klarinet, Horn og Fagot) but then refers to it simply as the "Wind Quintet" in the text. "Wind Quintet" is certainly the common designation in English. I believe it is also called "Bläserquintett" in German. I have not heard it referred to as Piccolo Quintet in English. However, "Piccolo Quintet" seems to be correct for Waterhouse (different instruments).

Congratulations on all your wonderful music articles in English and all the DYKs. Are you thinking of writing an article on the Wind Quintet for the German WP? If so, let me know when it's up and running. Pity there is so little on Nielsen in German... - Ipigott (talk) 07:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I mean in general the phrasing or, more correctly. I said simply short for. Quintet would not be correct in the Waterhouse case, but Quintett. - Sorry, no time for the Nielsen at the moment, deep in Verdi ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Time enough to recommend you nominate the wind quintet for DYK. It's really easy, just click Nominate on the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:07, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I have never put in any of my own articles for DYK (probably a problem of personal modesty) but if you would like to nominate it, I would be very happy. I've actually completed a number of new articles on Nielsen's music and destubbed others over the past week or two and I'll be doing more. But if you like the Wind Quartet, then please go ahead and nominate it. And BTW, now that I have finally understood your query, I though more correctly was possibly going a bit too far and have now reduced it simply to or in more recent articles. See this one for example. And I'm really glad someone genuinely interested in music has finally caught up with me! - Ipigott (talk) 14:49, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I won't have much time for the next few days, choir rehearsals for Verdi all weekend, plus I want to get some singers' articles ready. If you don't want to rely on me, go ahead, do it yourself, self-nomination is encouraged. Stress on courage! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

a Norwegian photographer

Hello Mr Scandinavian Help Person. I've just perpetrated this series of edits, on a photographer whose name is entirely new to me. It appears that he has been one contributor to "Sort of Safe", an exhibition of social security (or similar) in the Nordic lands that has had quite a bit of exposure. Its subtitle has varied according to the locale but the main title "Sort of Safe" has remained the same; here's a German-language example.

I think that the world would benefit from a lot more intelligent photojournalism (and that it wouldn't suffer if it underwent a diminution of fashion photography or photography intended as "Art" commodity). But the masses want to buy neither periodicals with news stories in them or books thereof; slebs are so much more fascinating. ('Twas always thus; but recently, increasingly so.) Anyway, I'm inclined to help articles on people such as this. (And not to hinder, but also not to care much about, articles on photographers of frocks.) But alas I only read one variant of Germanic. Can I interest you in this man? -- Hoary (talk) 00:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Always good to hear from you Hoary and learn of your latest interests. But I'm not too sure what you want me to do for you now. Are you suggesting I should beef up the article on Kleve-Ruud or rather research "Sort of Safe", about which he has written a book? As for your language knowledge, with today's machine translation tools, you shouldn't be shy of asking for Google English translations of info on websites in Scandinavian languages. The Google stuff is really not too bad and getting better all the time. Just look at this, for instance. I see that "Sort of Safe" has reached the dizzy heights of receiving support from the Danish Embassy in London as you can see here.

So where do we go now? It looks as if this could open up an entire new chapter on photography and photographers but I'm not too sure it should be one of my priorities at the moment. I'm actually right in the middle of improving the WP article on the composer Carl Nielsen which has led to lots of new articles on his compositions. I really should finish this off before taking on something new. But if you can be a bit more specific, perhaps I can help out. - Ipigott (talk) 15:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Mmm, I don't know, really. I'd thought that something about him might happen to interest you for a productive ten minutes; but it seems not to have. Well, no worry.

As for Nielsen, I'm afraid problems remain. In the introduction alone, I notice three.

First, "widely recognised as Denmark's most famous composer" seems odd to me. Putting aside the questions of (a) factual accuracy and (b) whether it's "encyclopedic" to talk about greatness or fame, any of

• widely recognised as Denmark's greatest composer
• Denmark's most famous composer
• Denmark's most widely recognised composer

would be understandable and idiomatic.

Secondly, it talks of "the international repertoire" and then of the US, as if the latter weren't subsumable under "international".

Thirdly, his work was "later diverging more radically from accepted standards of composition"; but I'd thought that during his lifetime the "accepted standards" were fizzling away (except perhaps in some fuddy-duddy conservatories); perhaps "diverging more radically from what had in his youth been accepted standards of composition" or perhaps I just misunderstand. (I did read on, but was stumped by e.g. "the last two [symphonies] inhabit a completely new world of Nielsen's own devising, wherein the structure of the movement can only be understood within the context of the material he is working with".) -- Hoary (talk) 13:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I certainly did not mean that Kleve-Ruud was not an interesting person to follow up. I'll probably get around to him sooner or later but just now I busy with other things - and not just Wikipedia. The other thing that worried me is that there seem to be many other Nordic photographers involved in the "Sort of Safe" environment. I look into all in more detail when I get back to Luxembourg next week.

Thanks for all your points on Carl Nielsen. They are certainly all valid and concern sections of the article I have not really worked on yet. I've been trying to cover a wider selection of his works but I'll start working on the lead and the sections on the symphonies. - Ipigott (talk) 17:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I've looked into Luca Kleve-Ruud and am sorry to report that I can find very little about him other than what is in his own biography on his website. His awards are reported in the newspaper where his photos appeared and the Sort of Safe thing does not feature him any more prominently than the other Scandinavian photographers. So the "facts" are difficult to substantiate and there is not much more, even in Norwegian, I can find out about him. If you are interested, Sort of Safe seems to have been financed indirectly by the Nordic Council. A bunch of photographers were sent to Denmark on a kind of course, after which they participated in rather crazy "social" projects. Kleeve-Ruud lived off garbage for a month and then furnished an apartment with rubbish - literally. Do you think these details would be worthy of an encylopedic article?

On Carl Nielsen, I've tried to improve the bits you commented on but I have a bit of a problem. Much of the text without specific references appears to have been gleaned from books by either David Fanning or Robert Simpson, both considered to be experts on Nielsen. While I can easily find good new authentic references, for instance from the Royal Danish Library, I am not too sure what I should do with the existing stuff which is not clearly referenced. Perhaps I should try to get their books to check things out. Any advice? (BTW, Nielsen does seem to have been in the forefront of orchestral experimentation in his day - so I don't want to be too dismissive.) Do you think it would be useful to transfer our discussion to the article's talk page? - Ipigott (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Let's forget about Luca Kleve-Ruud then. If his idea of covering a social issue is to bring it upon himself -- well, we've already been there with Sullivan's Travels. Perhaps it's interesting, more likely it isn't; others can spend their time finding out and editing appropriately.

The other day I got hold of a library copy of the alarmingly large book Die Stadt: Vom Werden und Vergehen (bilingual, and also with an English title that I can't remember offhand -- not the one given in the publisher's English page on it). It's by photographers I hadn't heard of who are in an agency I hadn't heard of. The quality is a bit mixed and the appeal to me is very mixed, but I'd very much like to see more of the work of several of the contributors. Ah, very convenient, the page lists the lot; let's try linking them: Sibylle Bergemann, Jörg Brüggemann, Espen Eichhöfer, Annette Hauschild, Harald Hauswald, Pepa Hristová, Andrej Krementschouk, Ute Mahler & Werner Mahler, Thomas Meyer, Dawin Meckel, Julian Röder, Frank Schinski, Jordis Antonia Schlosser, Anne Schönharting, Linn Schröder, Heinrich Völkel, Maurice Weiss. Let's look at the blue ones: yes, this is our Hauswald, but Meyer is a disambig page for unrelated Meyers. I suppose (without actually investigating) that several of these people hardly qualify for articles but that others certainly do. They'll probably never get them unless they become slebs of one kind or another (yawn). (Or perhaps artistes. Damn!)

And so on to Nielsen. I now think that what I wrote about "accepted standards of composition" was greatly exaggerated. However, I think there's a problem with the kind of sources that were used (even if they have been summarized scrupulously). It hardly seems possible for a publisher to put out a biography of somebody who is not a sleb and can't be touted as utterly remarkable, a pioneer, a genius, a pervert, a madman or whatever. Such biographies must compete with fat and flashy (self-) hagiographies of ignorant, opportunistic politicians and the like. The biographer who is concerned with somebody who, like most worthy biographees, was genuinely talented and turned perspiration into satisfying work must talk up the subject in order to prompt sale-inducing cover blurb. Perhaps the biographers themselves come to believe it. My own (extremely uninformed and unqualified) impression was that Nielsen put out good works via his own intelligent use of and mild innovations to established techniques. It would be good to see the degree to which he was an innovator described by a few writers of more general histories of early 20th century music, writers able to put him in perspective. -- Hoary (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

That's quite a mouthful for one message! When I'm through with Nielsen, I'll certainly look at your list of photographers and attempt to put at least some of them on the map. Your suggestion on Nielsen is certainly worth looking into more closely. Nevertheless, I was interested to see that his music is gaining popularity internationally. For example, the Carl Nielsen Society lists some 70 concerts featuring music by Nielsen in the USA for the current season, and internet searches show that there are quite a few more which have not yet been listed. So I think it is worthwhile completing my assignment by writing a few more short articles on his more popular compositions. Then, with luck, I'll have a bit more time for photography. - Ipigott (talk) 08:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The lastmentioned only if you're interested. ¶ Nielsen is good. Somewhere, I have a medium-sized LP collection (yes, I'm not called "hoary" for nothing), and he's represented in it. He and his works richly merit good articles. Plus he's Danish, which makes him easier for you to work on and makes your contributions more valuable. Keep going! -- Hoary (talk) 11:01, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Interestingly Sibylle Bergemann, who is on the German Wikipedia, just died on 1 (or 2?) November. There are lots of detailed obituaries: see here and here. And this one is good for sources. She seems to have done an excellent job at documenting developments in East Germany, especially East Berlin, and later went on world-wide assignments for Stern. She certainly deserves an article in the EN WP too. I'll get around to it in a few days unless you want to get the ball rolling. Shouldn't be too difficult. I'm glad to hear your interest is growing in Nielsen too. Any further advice you would like to offer on the main article would be appreciated. Sooner or later I might have a go at getting it up to GA status but for the time being I'm still busy with articles on his works. - Ipigott (talk) 11:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

No, no, I always was interested in Nielsen; it's just that remarks I posted earlier were poorly written and gave an impression other than what I'd intended. ¶ I shan't be able to start any article for a week or so, but I'd happily collaborate in one on Bergemann. My chronic problem, though, is that I'm almost monolingual, with feeble reading ability in French and Japanese. -- Hoary (talk) 13:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I noticed Sort of Safe in a bookstore here the other day and took a look. The young folk who contributed to it did so with great attention to being "artistic" and "ironic", and the result is as boring as you might imagine. Actually at least one section isn't boring, but it wasn't Luca Kleve-Ruud's. I thought momentarily of looking up Kleve-Ruud in the contents list but the book as a whole was so dispiriting that I stuck it back in the shelf instead. There's more than enough good stuff to be getting on with, even if it's hugely outweighed (in bulk, not value) by all the fashion, sleb, "edgy", selfconsciously vacuous, and other photographic sludge that's reverently exhibited, published, and bought. -- Ranty (rants) 02:00, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Outline of culture

 Done

Neglected Portal Denmark

Hi Ipigott, as a "Danish Barnstar of National Merit" recipient :) and frequent contributor to article illustrations, you might be interested in contributing to Portal:Denmark, in particular the Selected picture section. Currently abandoned, and "anarchistic", I am sure your contributions would make it instantly better. --Elekhh (talk) 08:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Elekhh, I know Portal Denmark has been neglected. But I don't think I'm the right person to take care of it despite your flattery. I'm far better at building up content in the articles and I am not too familiar with the mechanics of portals. But just now, for example, I am trying to improve coverage of Denmark's most famous composer, Carl Nielsen. And if you look at the previous message on this page, you'll see that Hoary wants me to spend more time on articles about photography! - Ipigott (talk) 17:13, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I understand. Btw I reopened an older topic here. --Elekhh (talk) 03:42, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Great. I've dropped another word of support. But it'll be a miracle if we succeed! - Ipigott (talk) 12:30, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Nielsen

I thought of you when I added a Nielsen work to new singer Andreas Pruys. You might want to join the project Classical music for such topics. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda, for your kind suggestion. My problem is that I'm interested in virtually all branches of the arts and culture. At the moment I am working on Nielsen simply because he was so seriously underrepresented on Wikipedia. But when I'm finished with him, I might be back on painting, or architecture, or even history. Interesting article on Andreas Pruys. Is it not possible to find a date of birth for him? - Ipigott (talk) 16:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, I decided one more Wikiproject would do no harm - so you can now find my amoung the participants of classical music too. - Ipigott (talk) 15:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you and will have a look soon... Schissel | Sound the Note! 14:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought of you again adding the Wind Quintet to William Waterhouse and the Melos Ensemble, - the other players to come eventually, oboe needs to be created first ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me posted. - Ipigott (talk) 07:35, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Flatus

Hold your nose, take a look, and have a laugh. -- Hoary (talk) 02:16, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a great deal of hype. But this is not surprising as the article was written by France Rivet, also a Canadian photographer who has taken pictures of the far north. She appears to be a close associate of Blohm. One of the edits even reports she has corrected the text after reviewing it with Blohm. Her contribs since August 2010 all seem to have been related to promoting Blohm. I found it very difficult to find any links on the first four pages of a Google search which provided any objective information about Blohm. All the hits were either from Blohm's own site, from his publishers or from Masterfile with which he is associated. The Ottawa newspaper articles cited in the article are pretty old too and last year's Above & Beyond inflight magazine article was probably largely a result of Blohm's own account of himself. The only book listed in the LOC catalog is [this one], written essentially by Anthony Stafford Beer. The reviews of Blohm photos are not all so positive either - see here. I also found it quite difficult to find any of Blohm's photographs until I searched specifically in Masterfile. But perhaps I'm being too critical. Half the art of doing well in photography seems to be the result of bragging. (BTW, just about finished with Carl Nielsen, I think.) - Ipigott (talk) 10:18, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Good sleuthing there, Ipigott! I didn't think of investigating. I did notice that the main author seemed to have devoted a huge amount of effort to boosting Blohm all over WP. The article stank but it looked as if there was something to the man's work, so I had a bash at trimming extremes of awfulness from the start -- but I quickly got bored. ¶ I agree with you about the relationship between bragging and success in photography, and that's aside from the enormous percentage of "notable" photography made up of fashion/sleb/erotica stuff, which doesn't interest me in the slightest. ¶ However, it's not all bad news. Today I discovered a stub on Joakim Eskildsen whose book The Roma Journeys I've seen and know is good. -- Hoary (talk) 14:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Eskildsen seems to have done some really good work. But how on earth could he spend so many years on the road without any income? - Ipigott (talk) 17:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't know. But some photographers -- or "artists working in photography", as I believe they now prefer to call themselves -- are born into money and sensibly work their way through it. (Here's an example.) Other well-heeled amateurs move into "real work" later and combine the two; one of these decades I must do justice to this extraordinary figure as well as his more and less extraordinary brothers (since it's pretty obvious that nobody else will). Others combine photography with househusbandry while the missus wears the trousers and holds down a nine-to-six. And plenty of photographers in Japan (and I presume elsewhere) have done photography wherever the biggest money is (often cosmetics, fashion, and so forth), said nothing much about this, and received attention for the non-commercial and very different work they did in their spare time. Thus it is that I keep coming up against vanity articles on popinjays who claim to have done (presumably humdrum) work for a number of brands that I presume are supposed to awe us; by contrast, Takanashi was doing that kind of thing (about which few now know or care) perhaps four days a week in order to do the work for which he's rightly known. But I digress. -- Hoary (talk) 00:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Nielsen template

Hello again-again. I have made a draft for a template with Nielsen's works which I have for now left in a sandbox here until I know if you think it is relevant. There seems to be a tradition for seperate templates for symphonies, concertos etc and I do realize that there is already one for his symphonies but with the relatively low number of works and many new articles I thought it might be better to through them all in one big template. At least I think it will give a better overview, highlight the high number of articles on individual works and endorse readers to explore them, and increase the number of links to each article considerably. Well what do you think? And feel free to make any changes yourself or tell me what changes to make and I'll implement them.Ramblersen (talk) 00:51, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I was in fact wondering myself whether it would be a good idea to have a template all Nielsen's major works. I'm glad you came up with the same idea - so I think we should go áhead. Just a few initial suggestions. It's not necessary to put a number next to the concertos: there was only one of each. I think it would also be useful to specify what some of the other works were, e.g. Chaconne (for piano), Saga-Drøm (tone poem). And then I think that there are a number of other works which should be included even if there are not (yet) articles about them. If you like, I could try to edit some in on your sandbox page. - Ipigott (talk) 08:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I have now uploaded the template, just make whatever changes you find appropriate. no need to disvuss them with me first since you are obviously the expert. Do you think there should be other subgroups - such as 'Indidental music' or 'Other orchestral works'? I also wondered if operas and choral works should be split.Ramblersen (talk) 16:37, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all the good work on this. There's just one problem. With the colour scheme you've used, it's difficult to see the "show" and "hide" buttons on the RH side of the bar. It might be a good idea to use colours that contrast better. I toyed with the idea of adding additional works but have decided to wait until there are WP articles about them. Have you any experience with media files (i.e. sound)? I think the main article could do with a few more. - Ipigott (talk) 11:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The colour scheme seems to be standard for classical music templates so I thought it would be best to go with it (see for instance here and here but it pretty much goes for anyone there is). But if you really dislike it I can change it if you say which colours you'd like or you can play around with it yourself. I don't think it is too hard to see the way it is now though. And for everybody which has opened a wikipedia template before it should not be a problem anyway. No experience with media files whatsoever.Ramblersen (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

My mistake with the colours. They are fine as they are. The problem occurs when you click on show or hide - then the colours seem to merge. But they do with all the other composer templates too. So let's just keep it the way it is. - Ipigott (talk) 13:42, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

¡¿"Danish photography" deletion shock horror sensation?!

See this and weep! (Or not.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Fine by me. But you might run into opposition. I once tried to argue along the same lines for architecture as I thought Category:Luxembourgian architecture sounded pretty stupid, especially as the adjective Luxembourgian doesn't exist in Luxembourg. It was however ruled out a couple of months later after lengthy discussions. So good luck! - Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I can't say that I've ever heard "Luxembourgian" used in English either. ("Luxembourgeois", perhaps.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Luxembourgeois is a bit dated now. It goes back to the days when Grand Duchess Charlotte (from Belgium) ruled the court. If you really need an adjective or want to describe the language (dialect??), it is usual to use Luxembourgish but the general tendency is just to say Luxembourg (as in Luxembourg photography for example - which I might get around to writing one of these days as Photography in Luxembourg). - Ipigott (talk) 13:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm surprised by the number of its practitioners. Yes, there could be an article in that. -- Hoary (talk) 14:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there's quite something to work on there. Good thing I can read Luxembourgish - though I try to avoid speaking it whenever possible. I was surprised to see that Edward Steichen only made it into the Italian cats: it:Categoria:Fotografi lussemburghesi although he's still regarded as one of Luxembourg's national heroes with a permanent exhibition (The Family of Man) in Clervaux. - Ipigott (talk) 14:49, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

But wasn't Steichen a mere infant when he arrived in the US and A? Calling him a Luxembourgishian photographer would seem a bit of a stretch. -- Hoary (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Technically you are right of course. But that's not the way the Luxembourgers see it. He has one of the longest articles in the Luxembourg encyclopedia. - Ipigott (talk) 08:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Don't know if you are still watching my talk page, Hoary, but if so you might be interested in the fact that there are two categories for Indonesia: one is Category:Indonesian photographers, the other is Category:Photography in Indonesia. There is a rather nice distinction between the two. - Ipigott (talk) 13:31, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I have eyes everywhere. But thank you all the same! -- Hoary (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hope you also have an eye on Category:Luxembourgian photographers. I'm trying to create some valid content there! - Ipigott (talk) 14:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll try. Meanwhile, try this article and then the man's own website (linked from its foot). -- Hoary (talk) 14:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

[Cough] -- Hoary (talk) 11:21, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Kut and paste, or run

Ipigott, I know that use in German of "c" and "k" wobbled during the 20th century (e.g. the whatever of Dr Caligari), but could you look again at your articles on your Kutters (or Cutters), to make sure that the choice between the two is the better one.

(My own uneducated guess is that the individual members of the family wouldn't even have been consistent in their own use, instead changing their tastes over time and also perhaps even at a single given time using their preferred form but where necessary also the other form.)

I bother to write this partly because articles on the /k/ utter mob seem set to proliferate. -- Hoary (talk) 05:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

This was purely a case of carelessness. Good job you have an eagle eye for these things. They should of course all be Kutter - and I think by now they are. - Ipigott (talk) 13:44, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Roman Villa Borg

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Good info, I will visit some day! Placed it here and in the archive, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda. Seems to be a great portal. - Ipigott (talk) 08:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Image searching

At some point you recommended some image search tool but since it happend in some sandbox of mine which has since been blanked for other use, I cannot identify it. So could you please remind me what it was called? And another REALLY dumb question: They have changed Flicker since I last uploaded pictures from it, I used to just right click the picture and save it on my computer but that does not work now. So how do you best and most easily ipload pictures from Flicker noy, say with something like this one, Ramblersen (talk) 15:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Good to hear from you again. The site for Creative Commons photos is here. As far as I can see, the Black Diamond image from Flickr you want to copy is not public domain - so that might be why you are having difficulties. Those you find through the Creative Commons search should not present any problems. Good luck. - Ipigott (talk) 21:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Just checked your Black Diamond image from Flickr. The problem was that you did not request the better resolution version which is here. As far as I can see, you can copy this without any problems. - Ipigott (talk) 21:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link and yes the problem seemed indeed to be that I did not request the better resolution. But now I am confused, isn't it okay to upload files which are "Some rights reserved - Attribution 2.0"?Ramblersen (talk) 09:14, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

If you click on the "Some rights reserved" you get this screen which explains that it is OK to use the image providing you give its source. I see btw that you've been very productive lately. I'll try to go through your latest additions as usual. - Ipigott (talk) 09:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Well that seems to be the license most pictures from Flicker on Wikipedia are uploaded under. As for my productivity, I guess I should spend more time on each article but I tend to get stuck in them and then it just seems easier and more rewarding to pass on to something new. Bad habit. I see you have already worked your way through them, thanks!Ramblersen (talk) 14:05, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Photography in Luxembourg

Snippety-snop. I hope I got that right; feel free to revert any part if I didn't. -- Hoary (talk) 01:34, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Most of your edits are very good, as usual. The only change I am a bit concerned about is "residents of Luxembourg" instead of "true Luxembourgers". Some of the true Luxembourgers in question are not in fact residents of Luxembourg. Do you think "Luxembourg nationals" would do? - Ipigott (talk) 08:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes of course. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I wonder how sleepy I must have been to have misread your simple suggestion so stupidly. But all's well, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 13:36, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Photothèque (Luxembourg)

Materialscientist (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

References, or not

Erm . . . [cough] . . . sorry, but no; please see this. (Thus my edit.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Hoary, once again. But you are always so quick! I hope to go back to the article and provide some authentic references. I would also like to develop some of the content. So when that happens, I can reinsert the References heading. --Ipigott (talk) 08:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

re:DYK

Hello Ipigott. The articles you've created are very good and informative, and you work in the area of my interest (architecture, art, photography ...). It's always nice to meet a person with similar "hobbies". No problem with the Kozyrev's article, it's up to you :) I wish you good luck, and don't hesitate to let me know in case you need any help with the DYK or elsewhere. Best regards. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 17:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Yuri Kozyrev

Hello! Your submission of Yuri Kozyrev at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Fine Arts

		The Barnstar of Fine Arts
		For your invaluable contributions to a wide range of articles on arts and culture, and in particular the overarching topic improvements to architecture, painting and photography. You efforts surely made a great difference for many editors and readers. Elekhh (talk) 05:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

This is certainly a big surprise. Thank you so much for your kind recognition, Elekhh. As you must know, you have played no small part yourself in encouragement and have always been ready to assist when necessary. - Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Yuri Kozyrev

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The Classical Barnstar

		The Classical Barnstar
		For your work on Carl Nielsen which raised the article to B-class and the creation of related articles, significantly improving the coverage of this composer. Mirokado (talk) 08:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Well done. A lot of careful work was needed for these updates. Mirokado (talk) 08:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Mirokado. It was all very interesting and rewarding work. If I can find one or two other enthusiasts, I would like to work towards a GA. As you no doubt noticed, there are still problems of referencing and there are far too few audio clips. - Ipigott (talk) 08:19, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes that is the next step. I have started looking through the refs. The Carl Nielsen Edition refs will be "interesting" to sort out as apart from the problem of deep links not working, some of the PDF links are shared and those PDFs relate to printed material too. Maybe several changes before the refs are both complete and convenient for the reader. Mirokado (talk) 13:44, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

While the "Carl Nielsen Edition" is an excellent source of information, the Internet links are a considerable problem. On the one hand, the links at the Carl Nielsen Edition Download page are not only sometimes incorrect but many have changed over recent months. That explains why some of my original references simply became dead links. Of course, for the user, it would be much more convenient to link to the actual document in question rather than to an index page. Perhaps the answer would be to download all the links into the special area of Wikipedia reserved for Internet links which are liable to change or disappear (although I can't remember exactly how this works). Alternatively, we could wait for a month or two and see if things settle down. The other problem with referencing is the need to get more exact inline refs to the sections which draw on Fanning and Simpson. Unfortunately I am not in Denmark at the moment and cannot get hold of the books in question. Perhaps all this should be on the article's talk page? And while I'm here, I am rather concerned that the talk page still has a link to an assessment page here which is no longer valid. Should this not be removed? - Ipigott (talk) 14:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

They seem to be converting from PDF extracts to full PDFs of the published material. The latter are accessed through an export url which cannot be deeplinked. Pooh! On the other hand they are providing a lot of stunning material online even if it is a little inconvenient for us. I've finished the main ref tidyup now and added a new section to the CN talk page. By all means start a section there about the questionable refs too. --Mirokado (talk) 20:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Icelanders

Er (cough), sorry, no. See Icelandic name, and perhaps also this "inactive" page. -- Hoary (talk) 05:08, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing my attention to Wikipedia's Icelandic name sorting rules however "inactive" they may be. I can see, however, that if these are to be applied systematically, we have a huge task ahead. I have had a quick look at the sorting in some of the Icelandic categories, not just Category:Icelandic photographers but, for example, Category:Icelandic painters or Category:Icelandic film directors. Now while I don't want to embark on another dangerous discussion (cf your recent capital punishment), I would argue that users of the English Wikipedia would hardly expect to find Icelandic names sorted by the first name, especially in general categories where Icelanders are listed alongside other nationalities. For example, Sólveig Anspach (who is listed under Anspach) appears under the As in Category:European film director stubs where anyone who doesn't know she is Icelandic would expect to find her. So once again it's a matter of deciding whether Icelandic or English rules of sorting should be used. I know that when we invited Icelanders to international conferences, we invariably sorted them in "English" alphabetical order. There's a good example here. In Icelandic, there are of course additional problems with names beginning with non-English letters, e.g. Þórbergur Þórðarson, or those with more than one given name like Einar Thor Gunnlaugsson who is usually referred to as Einar Thor and listed under the Ts. So I really have my doubts about how to proceed. Perhaps the best solution is to do nothing about it at all! But I'll certainly refrain from applying English sorting rules to Icelandic names in the future. - Ipigott (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

My recent capital punishment? I know I've been accused of "hissy fits", vandalism, stupidity and more; but sticks and stones and all that. Or so I had thought. Now, however, I realize that I have died and gone to a place that is ... much like where I was before. (And that stuff is now at Talk:Toyoko Tokiwa.) So this is the afterlife. Well well. ¶ But back to Iceland. I suppose the problem here is that WP doesn't allow us to index people in two ways. It would (or at least might) be rather good to have

• {{DEFAULTSORT:Ragnar Axelsson}}
• {{DEFAULTSORT:Axelsson, Ragnar}}

So everything comes twice. No, hang on, we can improve on that. How about combinations such as

• [[Category:Icelandic somethingorothers|Ragnar Axelsson]]
• [[Category:NotonlyIcelandic somethingelses|Axelsson, Ragnar]]

Worth calm discussion among adults, I think, even if one of them (me) is the walking dead. -- Hoary (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Passing by: every time that I incidentally have two DEFAULTSORT in an article, I am told that the last one will overwrite the first, so that won't work. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Mmm, see this. -- Hoary (talk) 11:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)