User talk:Claude T/Archive4

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Recalling information for non-withdrawn editions?

Hi Claude. I see you have been at work moving information from the Edition: records back to score pages. Has this been discussed among Admins and a decision taken to do this? If so, I have apparently been left in the dark on this matter and would like to know what the reasoning behind this decision has been. Thanks!! – Chucktalk Giffen 18:47, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Chuck. There has been no group discussion. My reasoning follows: 1. The informations restored on works pages for not-withdrawn editions stay on their Edition:CPDL nnnn respective page. 2. I remember that more than one admin regret, somewhere in the forums, what we did you and me in 2012: extracting information from work pages to edition pages. You answered there that it was only for withdrawn editions. 3. Recently, someone removed all withdrawn Edward Tambling's editions from works pages after a discussion on the forums. 4. More recently even, I realized that, for modified work titles (adding Purcell's Z number, for example) the Edition:CPDL nnnn pages were *NOT* actualized, breaking so the links between works pages and corresponding extracted editions. 5. Lastly, you could imagine it's difficult to get reliable statistics when more than 20,000 editions stay on their respective works pages but 468 are extracted on individual edition pages, 200 withdrawn and 268 not withdrawn. There are also many withdrawn editions (for copyright reasons or by other editors than Edward Tambling) that were *NOT* extracted to an individual Edition:CPDL page. Do you think this is optimal? Claude (talk) 19:43, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

LilyPond to {{Ly}} to Lilypond?

Hi Claude. First we had "LilyPond" as the (correct) name for the link to the source code for LilyPond (.ly) files. Then it was changed (by you) to {{Ly}} which provided a LilyPond icon link that anyone could see (by checking the Legend) what the icon means. And now, you've gone and changed these to "Lilypond" (which is wrongly spelled, since it is supposed to be "LilyPond"). I fail to see why you think it is necessary to do this. Granted, I made a mistake changing "Finale 20xx" links to a generic Finale icon link, but we don't have the problem with version numbers being part of the link for LilyPond files. If you want to keep the principle of your latest change, then at least it should be corrected from "Lilypond" to "LilyPond" (which I will do). When I goofed previously with the Finale file links, I believe I was asked to discuss any such changes I was likely to make with other Admins before taking such action, and it seems that perhaps your agenda for making the LilyPond changes should also be discussed first. It is not easy for individual Admins to work on their own projects and have purposes for doing so that other Admins are unaware of. We need more communication and agreement, don't you think? Best wishes for Christmas and the New Year, and thanks for your diligent work. – Chucktalk Giffen 18:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

You're right, Chuck, more communication is always better. But in this precise case the reason was difficult to explain in a language that is not my native language: to obtain statistics about links, I need to notice if links are in a group beginning with {{L ({{Llink or {{LinkW groups) or [{{filepath links. You can easily understand on what side will a {{Ly string fall. BTW, are you Ok if I revert the changes concerning MUS files/icon? Do you know that there are other MUS files than from Finale? A happy new year to you and your relatives. Claude (talk) 22:47, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Claude. Thanks for your speedy reply; already, I have changed "Lilypond" to "LilyPond" to get the correct form of the program name. And now I understand your concern, but I wonder: Wouldn't it have been simpler to change {{Ly}} to {{ly}}, thus preserving the icon as a link? {{ly}} still calls the same template as {{Ly}}. As for changing the icon {{mus}} link for Finale files back to Finale 20xx links, I'm in the process of doing it, being careful to change only those that were associated to Finale source files originally. Many thanks for your explanation. If your statistics gathering can work with "ly" instead of "Ly" then we can go ahead and replace the "LilyPond" links with {{ly}}. Health and happiness in the New Year to you and your relatives. – Chucktalk Giffen 23:42, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, Chuck, I'll use the lower-case trick. Remember I asked on forums before uncapitalizing English 'incipit' titles ;-) Claude (talk) 07:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

O Sanctissima (Angelina Figus)

Hi Claude, regarding this O Sanctissima (Angelina Figus), on the same day that that page was created, you added a cleanup notice informing that "No 'Music files' section, AddWork form not used->page to be deleted". However, Angelina had filled out the Add Work file correctly, as can be seen in the logs; she probably only made a confusion during the copy/paste process. Anyway, her edition was moved to O Sanctissima (Traditional), where it belongs. :) Best, —Carlos Email.gif 05:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Carlos. 1. Before deletion, page had no link/file, isn't it? 2. "as can be seen in the logs": I use to see the 'Recent Changes' page and subsequently new pages, but not upload logs. Where are they? Claude (talk) 08:44, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Claude, I supposed that you also received by email a copy of the submissions made via the Add work form. I created a folder on my Gmail account that stores these emails since Oct 2008; their number has reached 16026 submissions today. :) But the data is also stored on our databases. I'll see with Max if there is an easy way to let you access this information. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 16:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, no, thanks. I'm not part of the group of admins that manage submissions, and not willing to enter it. ;-)) Claude (talk) 16:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Blocked user?

Hi Claude. Why did you block User:Su_Ce and disable the account? I received an email from the person who registered with that username wondering why she cannot log in. She wants to do some helpful editing, and your block also blocked her IP addresses, making it impossible to contribute her efforts to CPDL. Please unblock her and explain to her what happened, okay? – Chucktalk Giffen 19:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Chuck. I've just unblocked this user. The reason to block was that Su_ce reads and sounds exactly in French as Su_ck in English. Don't know how to explain that outside but if you want to lead her to my talk page... Claude (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Claude. I'll point her to this discussion. – Chucktalk Giffen 20:43, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


Hi Claude!

With regard to reintroducing the PostedDate template to editions from which NewWork has been removed, would you mind waiting a bit before you go on with this? I'd like to discuss it more thoroughly, as I don't see the need for this. If the dates are the same, why duplicate it? I envision for the future a single template for editions, that would look more or less like this:

|Submitted=           |Posted=
|Editor=              |Editor2=

The parameter |Submitted= would be a mandatory value (it already is), but not |Posted=, so that if it is empty, we know that the edition was posted on the same day. What do you think? —Carlos Email.gif 12:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Carlos. It's fine by me, I can wait. But you know Chuck hasn't the same idea. Claude (talk) 12:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Also, don't we need some EditionNotes text template, the last needed for an entirely templates-made edition? Claude (talk) 09:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Claude, I don't think so... templates should be created for useful purposes; simply replacing a text with a template that will display that very same text is not useful, in my view. By the way, Chuck had suggested in the forums to use just {{Posted}} instead of {{PostedDate}}; I like the shorter name, what about you? I'll make it a redirect; you may use it if you want; in case it is adopted, there's no need to replace PostedDate where it has already been used. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 13:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I, too, prefer the shorter one ;-)) Claude (talk) 14:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Merger of duplicate pages

Hi Claude! You suggested that 3 Drovers (Sarah Lambert) should be merged with 3 Drovers (William G. James), but they are in fact duplicate pages differing just in the composer name. In such cases you can simply delete one of them, or make it a redirect to the other. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 14:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes Carlos, but the difficulty is there: "Who is the right one?" Who is the composer, who is just a "little" arranger? ;-) I don't want to be a victim of contemporary "composers" hmm "arrangers". I let you go at it ;-)) Claude (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Ohhh I got it. You're a wise man! ;) I went ahead and deleted one of the pages, let's hope it won't cause any strong reactions! —Carlos Email.gif 15:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Newest form of Text Template

Hi Claude! I noticed you changed the page Creation (Oliver Holden) to conform to "Newest form of Text Template." The problem is that your edits put the title at the top of the first column, rather than above all the columns. I got the title to be above all the columns, but now there are several unwanted blank lines between. Do you know how to get this to work right? Where can I find a full explanation about how to use these templates properly? (Of course, it may be there, and I didn't find it; I am a relative newcomer. It would be easier if I just did it right the first time.) Is it just me, or does it seem that the "newer" form is a bit awkward when columns are involved? Is this "newer" template eventually going to supersede the older one? If so, there would be a lot of changes necessary, such as almost all the Psalms. Thanks for your help. – Barry Johnston, Bcjohnston523 (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Barry. Thank you for your contributions. I do appreciate the music you edit. About the Text template, Chuck recently added a variant to use when text spreads throughout the cells of a table, not each time with a text/Translation template: use {{Text|Simple| at the beginning and }} at the end as usual. That is not yet documented on the template page. For extra blank lines, I'm sure Chuck will find a solution. BTW, could you please generate a MIDI file of your editions? It's as easy as File/Save as.../MIDI. It's useful for choirs willing to separate voices for rehearsal to sing your editions. Thanks in advance, Claude (talk) 07:41, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Claude. Thanks for the explanation, and for the kind words. I will use the new text format variant as you say, but still a little confused about when to use newer vs. older formatting. About the changes you made yesterday, I used the standard template {{subst:text pages}} to create these pages; I will edit my new text pages to the new format (or is there already a new template?). I will create a MIDI file for all my editions, thanks for asking, and thanks again for your time. – Barry, Bcjohnston523 (talk) 21:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
I see that Carlos reverted Creation_(Oliver_Holden) back to the other text format, then you changed it back to your first edit, to the "newer" text format. I thought about just watching you fight it out to see how it would go, but nothing's happened for a while. So, I worked on it a bit, and finally got it to look something like correct, but it still has an extra line! I think I can live with it now. This must be showing all of us, I hope, the limitations of the "newer" format ({{Text|Language|..}} .. {{Text|Simple|..), especially when dealing with columns. All this for only ten bytes gained! Personally, I think you admins should start composing a user's guide on the use of the various text formats, including the limitations of each, and when each is appropriate -- that would help all of us. -- Barry, Bcjohnston523 (talk)
Well done, Barry! Thanks. Claude (talk) 05:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Barry, sorry if we left you in the expectation of an edit war, lol. Long edit wars as seen on Wikipedia will never happen here (hopefully!), as we're all a bunch of good old friends ;)
With regard to the best way of displaying text on a page, there really isn't a standard yet. It all depends on the layout one expects to see (with or without columns, etc.) It was me who first introduced this "new" template syntax, exactly two years ago, but I planned it to be used for only short texts in pages with very simple layout. It was a surprise to me to see that it had become the de facto standard very recently, since I particularly don't see the <poem> tags as evil things to be avoided at all costs. That's why I think that the new syntax shouldn't be forced on pages the layout of which it cannot replicate in a simple manner. With that in mind, please feel free to choose the format you prefer the most; I'm sure Claude won't mind if you return to the original syntax. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 00:17, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

{Verse} vs {Vs}

Hi Claude, you started mass replacing {{Verse}} with {{Vs}}, but did you notice that the latter one doesn't add a line break as the former? The resulting layout is less than desirable, since text and translation are no longer aligned: [1]. Is there any discussion about the adoption of this new template, that I may have missed? Thanks, —Carlos Email.gif 16:46, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't add a line break when it is not inside the curly brackets of your 2013 version of Text template. As all Vs templates will soon be inside a Text template… (Psalm 150 is yet aligned, as a majority of Psalms) Claude (talk) 16:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I see... that's strange! On a different subject, could you please check the texts at Que feu craintif (Jacquet de Berchem)? I find it strange that m'a and n'a are inverted in both texts; was it a typo, maybe? Thanks, —Carlos Email.gif 17:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Inside a "poem" environment or inside the new {{Text}}, {{Verse}} adds an extra line break (in addition to the new line already created by the environment. That is why I concocted {{Vs}}, to remove the extra line break. Outside a "poem" environment, {{Verse}} adds a line break, while {{Vs}} does not, and this is where the problem is with the mass replacement of {{Verse}} by {{Vs}}, since there are formatting issues that arise until such time as the text is put inside a "poem" environment or inside {{Text}} (or {{Translation}}. Finally, with the Psalm pages, it will be necessary to apply further formatting fixes, mostly because of the two column format, but also because a lot of the original formatting was done "visually" rather than according to Psalm structure of most verses: a typical verse has the form (initial statement): (response statement) ... and starting a new line with the (response statement), suitably indented, is the proper way to format Psalm texts. I've begun doing this, and it is not a simple matter of using ReplaceText en masse. Also note that, {{Vs|}} or {{Vs| }} simply generates a NoBreakSpace, while {{Vs}} generates also a DigitSpace. – Chucktalk Giffen 17:48, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I used "m'a" four times. Claude (talk) 17:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Creating CPDL number categories and CPDL number pages


Hi Claude. Back near the end of January, I created templates {{CPDLnoCat}} and {{CPDLnoPage}} to handle the problem about manually creating Category:CPDL 351xy and ChoralWiki:CPDL 351xy. And at that time I created the relevant categories & pages through CPDL 350xy. I thought you knew about this, but apparently I failed to let you know that there are templates for the creation of these objects.

Nevertheless, had you looked at the history for ChoralWiki:CPDL 350xy, you would have seen that it was created using: {{subst:CPDLnoPage|350}}. Note that the template {{CPDLnoPage}} must be substituted to work properly. On the other hand, Category:CPDL 350xy was created with the simpler {{CPDLnoCat}}.

Seeing your summary comment (again) after you created ChoralWiki:CPDL 351xy, I created the corresponding pages through ChoralWiki:CPDL 360xy in just 3 minutes. Then I got a cup of coffee and created the categories Category:CPDL 351xy through Category:CPDL 350xy in less than 3 minutes!

I'm sorry that you hadn't known about the templates for creating these categories and pages.

Don't be sorry. I forgot you turned that easy to create such pages. But why all those CompCatTxt, EdCatTxt (or CatTxt - why do Carlos do that through another process?), etc., etc. are pointed from red links on each new created page? Again: if these categories aren't useful so soon, why create broken links from the first day? Claude (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)


Hi Claude! Thanks for adding the text to Questo è il giorno che ha fatto il Signore I (Paolo Pandolfo)! Just one minute before it, you added the same text to Abbiamo contemplato I (Paolo Pandolfo). You were probably so concentrated on the text itself that you didn't notice that the pages were identical, except for the wrong title in one of them. ;) —Carlos Email.gif 14:42, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Carlos. Thank you for having catched this and for having clarified things about Agnello di Dio (1992, 2001, etc.).Claude (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Regular expressions

Hi Claude, you must be careful when using regular expressions to replace texts; if not well defined, it can lead to undesirable results. See for instance this one edit, it changed the original CPDL license into a Personal license. This could have been avoided if, instead of '''Copyright:'''(.*)]] you had used something like ''Copyright:''' \[\[ChoralWiki:Personal\|(.*)]] to restrict the scope of the regular expression. Thanks, —Carlos Email.gif 00:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, Carlos. Sorry. Thanks again. Claude (talk) 06:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Amen (Michal Janošík)

Hello Claude. Could you please explain why you removed the Amen from the title of Michal Janošík's work? As strange as it may appear, "Amen" is the name he chose for his mass, so it has to stay on the works page title, don't you agree? Please check his Youtube and Soundcloud channels to confirm this. Best, —Carlos Email.gif 16:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I was forgetting the most important: the title I moved the page to was the one the composer himself had added to the duplicate page you deleted: [2]. Thanks, —Carlos Email.gif 16:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Ok, Carlos. Do you mean this mass is an 'Amen Mass'? We have to see that Amen is the name of the seventh and last movement. Even if it were a 'Kyrie Mass' or a 'Gloria Mass', we use this order: Paukenmesse for a german title, Missa solemnis, Missa super vecy..., Mass against the war but never 'Title of a mass' followed by parenthesis including 'Mass for such occurrence'. ;-) I take this opportunity to reaffirm that we are all friends here and that I did solemnly swear that NOT ANY beginning of an edit war will occur through me. Whatever should be your choice, it will also be mine. Friendly, Claude (talk) 17:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
LOL! I do believe in your good faith, don't worry about that. :)
I was thinking just like you, that Amen was due to the last movement of the work, but then I searched for his name and found the sites I cited above, where he titles his work like this: "Amen (Mass for mixed choir and orchestra)". So, we could maybe use a title such as "Missa Amen" for the sake of uniformity, but since the composer himself added the work, we should probably let him have the final say. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 17:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Veni, dilecte mi (Schütz)

Claude, thanks for adding the text to this work. I would have got round to it but allowed bodily needs (lunch) to take precedence over art! I've now added an approximate English translation. Jamesgibb (talk) 15:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, James. I know all your editions are complete ones. I just found the text over Internet, so easy to cut and paste ;-) Wish you all the best. Claude (talk) 16:24, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Not, Celia, that I juster am


Apologies, but when uploading this I got the name wrong. It should be "Not, Celia, that I juster am" not "Not, Celia, though I juster am.

Would you mind doing a correction please?

Jonathang (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Done, Claude (talk) 06:28, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


Hi Claude, after seeing your edit to L'Amfiparnaso I came up with the idea for a Text template that would fit in such situations. At first I thought of adapting {{SeeText}}, but then decided for a new one: {{ExtText}}. How do you like it? Any suggestions? —Carlos (talk) Email.gif 22:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Carlos. It's just perfect, I'll use it from now. We also need one for "No text on the score" and one for "No text can be seen because of permanently broken links" (so no text can be added on the page, in the contrary of what is shown by the ambiguous 'NoText' template. Thanks. Claude (talk) 05:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Cleaned up O Salutaris hostia S. 40 (Franz Liszt)

I moved the most recent Pandolfo entry and the 2000 Lukin entry to a new page O Salutaris Hostia S. 43 (Franz Liszt), and adjusted the composer page. Hope all is correct. Brian Marble (talk) 11:25, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Well done, Brian. Thank you very much. Claude (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


Hi Claude! Good idea to add the dimensions to those editions by Barry that had the "Unknown" paper size. I just realized that 254 x 177.8 mm is in fact 10 x 7 in, should we change it to inches? I'm trying to find the "official" name (if any) for this paper size; perhaps we could ask Barry how he names it, and add it to the options in the Add new work form.

Also, a tip for when you use the ReplaceText tool: in order to guarantee that you're going to make changes to editions by one specific editor only, use the filter "Replace only in category" and fill it in with "Barry Johnston editions", for instance.

Kind regards, —Carlos (talk) Email.gif 17:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah, Ok, Carlos, thanks. Claude (talk) 06:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Barry started adding "7 x 10 in (landscape)" to ScoreInfo, so I changed the other pages accordingly. Best, —Carlos (talk) Email.gif 13:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)