User talk:Carlos

From ChoralWiki
Revision as of 13:09, 9 June 2009 by Helder.wiki (talk | contribs) (obrigado...)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feel free to leave on this talk page questions and comments addressed to me.

  • Start new discussions by clicking here or on the "+" tab at the top of this page;
  • Continue discussions by clicking on the "edit" link directly right of the appropriate title below;
  • You may also send me an e-mail if you like.

If you have left a message on this page, I will reply here unless you request that I reply on your talk page. If I have left a message for you on your talk page, please reply there. The reason for this is to keep the discussion together. Thank you for your co-operation!

Archives

Old topics archived: 01 - 02 - 03

A ghost page

That one appears in listings like the one I'm working on, but can't be opened to rename it (because there is superfluous special character after the '!' in the title) and to add text. Thanks in advance. Claude 13:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the page in question is a blank page, and the extra character should simply be a space. The spurious page can be safely deleted. Something must have gotten fouled up when the work was submitted (I think someone tried to insert a no-break space in the title), and a new page needs to be created with the title as follows: St Mark Passion: No. 22 - Kreuzige ihn! (Reinhard Keiser). -- Chucktalk Giffen 18:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Claude (and Chuck), I still don't understand why some pages have had their titles messed up with these strange characters. I guess it happened during the migration of the old system to the wiki format, as it seems all pages with such problem are older than that. The page is now available under the corrected title given by Chuck above. The page does indeed exist (that's why it was categorized) but when someone clicks on the malformed title/link, is directed to another page, this one blank. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 19:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I can see three of this kind in the English text requests : H: Honeymouth, M: Moonchild, W: Wind, The. Very few indeed, among more than a thousand. Thanks in advance. - Claude 17:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Claude (the "Ghost Hunter" :^), the page titles were corrected. I also put the articles in the beginning ("The Wind", etc). Regards and thanks again for the texts you're supplying us with. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 19:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. I added separate files today - and some of it seems to work! I cannot get it to say "Sibelius 5".

Text when anonymous user tries to edit a page

Hi Carlos. Currently, when a user who isn't signed in tries to edit a page (ie. click on "View source"), they get the following Mediawiki standard text:

You do not have permission to edit pages, for the following reasons:
  • The action you have requested is limited to users in the group Users.
  • You must confirm your e-mail address before editing pages. Please set and validate your e-mail address through your user preferences.
You can view and copy the source of this page:
[page code]

Putting myself in an unregistered user's shoes, I don't think this is a very helpful message - it's potentially quite confusing since it suggests they just need to confirm their email address. Do you agree that it should be changed to something simpler like "You must log in or register if you wish to edit pages"? Since you have edited Mediawiki standard messages in the past, I thought I'd consult with you before changing this message. --Bobnotts talk 14:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes Rob, I agree that the message given is not very clear. But in fact this is not one single MediaWiki message, but a combination of three:
  1. MediaWiki:Permissionserrorstext-withaction
  2. MediaWiki:Badaccess-group1
  3. MediaWiki:Confirmedittext
I believe you could change the message #2 to the text you suggested, what do you think? —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 06:44, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for those links, Carlos. I've changed the second one as you suggested. I think making the wiki as accessible as possible is very important if we are to encourage new users to contribute. --Bobnotts talk 13:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Obrigado!

Que bom que conseguiu fazer funcionar, mesmo não sendo do jeito esperado... Acho que o que você fez pode servir para resolver um probleminha parecido que tivemos lá no Wikilivros.

Fiquei na dúvida: não seria melhor "Inclua uma partitura" em vez de "Inclua sua partitura"? Afinal, não é um projeto só para composições dos colaboradores, já que podemos carregar partituras de compositores renomados... O que acha?

Depois me avise que vou querer ver a tradução da página principal... =D

Um bom fim de semana pra ti! Heldergeovane 12:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Filling the Recent changes list

Carlos! You said you wouldn't fill the recent changes with text replaces! Could you mark the latest ones as bot edits or something please?! Thank you! --Bobnotts talk 22:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but the replaces are still under way! lol. As soon as it finishes I'll hide them. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 22:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Motets?

Hi Carlos, I visited my watchlist page and I noted that text replace has categorized as "motets" works that, in my opinion (but please note that I never received any music education), are difficult to classify as such (e.g., "Vesperae Solennes de Confessore" by Mozart, "Gloria" by Vivaldi, etc.). Maybe text replace is also replacing something that shouldn't be replaced? Max a.k.a. Choralia 20:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Max, these last changes made via ReplaceText were just to replace unformatted text with their template counterpart. No logic was involved to analyze the works, so none of them was "recategorized". See here and here to understand what I mean. These works were classified as Motets by the person who created the pages, or by someone else in a later time, but not by ReplaceText itself. Of course the correctness of this categorization can always be discussed with the editors of the works. Regards —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 21:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
You're right Carlos, I was mislead by the way the replacement is made. Quite strange that such works were categorized as motets, but this is a different discussion. Keep up with the good work. Max a.k.a. Choralia 22:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Dutch score submission guide

Hi Carlos. I may be wrong, but I think something has gone wrong in the Dutch score submission guide, in the section where users are referred to the Composter Template. The reference doesn't appear as a link, so I gather there is a coding error? Cordially, joachim 15:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Joachim, thanks for warning me of this problem; the Composer template had been renamed, and when the links to it were updated an extra space was introduced by mistake. It's fixed now. Regards, —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 16:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Creative Commons links

Hi Carlos. I noticed that you made some changes to the Creative Commons copyright page. The associated template works by linking to the appropriate title on the copyright page but these links don't work if the titles are removed, as they are now. Do you think it would be good to reintroduce these titles? --Bobnotts talk 17:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rob, I'm sorry, I had no idea that the template was so closely dependant upon the page structure. Having a second look at the page, though, I noticed that it's so short in content that even if we restore the titles as before, most of them will never scroll to the top of the page when selected. Anyway, I'll see what can be done. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 04:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
OK no problem. Thanks for the alteration. --Bobnotts talk 22:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"Instruments" template

Hi Carlos. You used Template:Instruments on this page but it hasn't categorised the score page in the appropriate category (as far as I can tell). I appreciate that this template is in the testing stages, but perhaps it would be better to test it on sandbox pages and use the templates that work correctly on actual score pages? What are your intentions for Template:Instruments? Presumably just the idea to use one template rather than 10 or 20? --Bobnotts talk

Hi Rob, you're right. I expected the template code would be ready sooner so that the results could be judged by the other admins. But since the template in its current situation doesn't disrupt visually the work page, I ask you to wait a few more days before removing it or replacing it with other accompaniment templates. As you probably are aware of, there are many hundreds (if not thousands) of works which haven't yet received any accompaniment templates, and my idea is to make this process somewhat simpler. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 18:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that probably there should be some wider discussion of just what else might (or might not) be put into this new Instruments template. And probably this discussion should come before, not after, the template is in more-or-less final form. I know that I have my own thoughts on the matter. Or, perhaps Carlos has some sort of large-scale changes in mind, in which case we should be made aware of them anyway for comments and suggestions. -- Chucktalk Giffen 19:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Well guys, the template is ready, as I roughly planned it. Please feel free to discuss it, change it at will or simply not use it at all. As you probably noticed, I prefer to present solutions first and discuss them later. If the presented solutions are rejected, no problem at all with me, I'm also learning a lot in the process of developing them. :) —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 19:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough, Carlos. It's nice to know what's going on in your head sometimes! Let's start up some discussion somewhere else. --Bobnotts talk 22:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia links

Thank you for invitation here at CPDL. Also your information certainly helped me to clarify some details. --Tomaxer 10:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for you welcome

Carlos - thanks for your welcome to CPDL. I am planning to go through the scores with errors and submit the new, corrected editions. If you could help with a page move (because of my clumsiness), I would really appreciate it. Freedomlinux 02:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Sua conta

É impressão minha ou você moveu apenas a sua página de usuário para outro nome, sem renomear a sua conta "efetivamente"? É que eu achei estranho não aparecer mais o link Contribuições do usuário. Se não me engano você tem como renomear a conta, pois é um dos burocratas. Heldergeovane 16:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Oi Helder, não sei se entendi bem sua dúvida, mas se você está falando da página User:Carlos Augusto Mourão, ela não é uma página de usuário de verdade, mas sim uma página de "contribuidor" como falam aqui na CPDL. A página da minha conta mesmo é a User:Carlos, que redireciona para a outra.
A propósito, você já viu a sugestão que dei ao "probleminha" que você citou em sua outra mensagem mais acima? —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 20:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Era essa página mesmo... Mas se era o esperado, tudo bem... =)
Ahh.. sobre o probleminha, eu tinha vindo aqui justamente procurar/descobrir onde foi q vc deixou aquele comentário, pois eu tinha lido ele, mas agora não sei onde foi... =/ Heldergeovane 21:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Obrigado por me lembrar da possível solução solução... Assim que der, faremos o teste lá no Wikilivros... Heldergeovane 13:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Change in policy

Hi Carlos. In this edit you missed off the score link. Has there been a change in policy since I was last here? ;-) Not trying to trip you up - did you just forget? I've added it anyway. --Bobnotts talk 15:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

No Rob, I deliberately leave these links off as I think it's an unnecessary double work that over time leads to numerous inconsistencies on the composer pages, besides making them too cluttered with icons. I've proposed more than once that this policy be changed, but while a consensus is not reached, I don't mind if others include the missing links (thank you for that).
I particularly think we should use the precious time dedicated to CPDL to accomplish nobler tasks, as helping people publish their files uploaded long ago (you know there are hundreds of editions that were "lost behind", as the one just published). A change in the Add Work process is also something that I consider urgent, if we want to somehow stop this hemorrhagy of editions that are sent but never get published. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 15:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not taking sides, here, but just adding what little I know about the situation. For what it's worth, since the add scores form includes score icons, I would guess that current policy (and policy/practice that has been in effect since the inception of ChoralWiki) indicates that score icons/links should be included (where there is just one edition) ... Raf and others argued that we should reduce the number of "clicks" to get to the sheet music. I suggest that perhaps we need to (re)open this policy topic ... preferably at the forums. -- Chucktalk Giffen 17:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Chuck, I agree that it would be a good thing if we could discuss this at the forums, hopefully with the presence of the other admins so that we could also hear their opinions and eventually reach a reasonable compromise. Another unfortunate decision that Raf Ornes took long ago that is also very inefficient in terms of the wiki system is the way files are linked today. When we link a file like this Icon_pdf.gif instead of like this PDF, the wiki system is unable to create a relationship between the page and the file, and we are unable to know what files are linked, and where they are linked. That's why at Wikipedia this kind of linking is totally discouraged. For this, an alternative would be to always use a template to link to local files, and make this template at the same time display an icon and create an invisible link to the file. More food for thought. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 06:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Carlos, until such discussion has begun and been concluded, please respect the standards currently in place regarding score links on composer pages. I have just added links to Cristian Gentilini. I would like to discuss any possible reform of this area but until we've reached a consensus, we need to keep things consistent. --Bobnotts talk 16:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
"we need to keep things consistent" — Wow, that'd be great! Then please go across all 1,464 composer pages and verify each of their works pages to make sure that all icons on the composer page are "consistent" with the policy. ;^) (You see what I mean? Consistency is simply impossible under the current policy.) Now being serious, I see your point, and will abstain to create new works pages until this subject is thoroughly discussed on the forums. —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 16:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree that things certainly aren't consistent at the moment. And whilst I appreciate you're not being entirely serious Carlos, I feel I need to explain my rationale for why I don't (or haven't yet) gone through every composer page and checked them. Basically, it's to do with acts and omissions. If I'm editing a score page for one reason or another, I will endeavour to correct any other problems with it even though I'm editing it for a different reason. But if I don't come to a page to edit it, I won't correct any minor inconsistencies, such as an incorrect listing of the number of editions of any of the works listed there. However, if I edit a page and deliberately fail to correct a serious problem that I notice (or at least flag it up with the cleanup template), then I fall short of my editing standards.
But please don't stop adding works from the add works email output. While I'm taking my exams, I can't keep up to date with all the latest submissions so I'd really appreciate it if you could just carry on adding works in line with the current standards until we figure out if (and if so, how) we're going to change them. Is that OK? --Bobnotts talk 09:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Carlos & Rob. I'm pretty sure that the original reason for links being constructed as external links like the Icon_pdf.gif link Carlos cites (but originally icons were not used) instead of internal wiki hyperlinks of the form [[media:Schu-Zwe.pdf|PDF]] was that, at the Stanford site, Raf had set things up so that clicking on an external link would open up a new browser page. This facility(?) was lost when we migrated ChoralWiki to new servers. I almost said something about it then, but then read up a little and found that such new browser window action is generally to be deprecated now. Since then, I've had no problem right-clicking and selecting "open in a new window" or "open in a new tab", so it no longer bothers me. All this suggests that it might be wise to convert back to internal links (for files hosted here). We would have to abandon the traditional use of clicking on icons in the process, but we might try something of the form Icon_pdf.gifPDF ... [[media:Schu-Zwe.pdf|PDF]]{{pdf}}. -- Chucktalk Giffen 12:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Files

Hi Carlos, I really like what you did with creating the subcategories of Files. Thanks for doing this! -- Chucktalk Giffen 17:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Well Chuck, in fact I thought that the category system would work better, but couldn't find any simple way to add the categories using the bot. There is a semi-automated way: to copy all filenames from, say, ChoralWiki:MID and paste them on a document as a list, so that the bot may read from it and categorize the files properly. I made such test to populate Category:MID, but am still not sure which presentation is better. What do you think? —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] Email.gif] 06:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)