text:
User talk:Tobycat

Amazon Links
Hi and Welcome! Its rather common to link to Amazon and other book sites - we even have an ISBN system for choosing a source. As for the opinion of commercial, its actually a very typical Book stub, and in any case, articles are what they are until someone edits them. SV|t|add 13:59, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * The aspect of "comfort" has long been dealt with - I cant even recall a discussion where one was uncomfortable simply for linking to Amazon.com or any other well established site. Linking to FoxNews may be controversial, but that's a different aspect altogether, and the issue tends to be "which links shall dominate the page?" What tends to be considered "commercial" is usually pretty obvious; spam articles about websites, which tend to look like "vanity" articles, or articles written in a very pov way, without any counterpoint. (Note that there is a perpetually fuzzy distiction between qualified article subject, proper title, and proper pov balance.) If the issue is "favoritism of Amazon" over other book sources, I do remember some technical discussion about linking that system to your personal user preferences, whereby you can simply choose which one or ones you prefer to link to. I personally find the ISBN list tediously long, as you can see yourself by clicking on any ISBN NUMBER link. Regards,SV|t|add 22:25, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bill Belichick
You're welcome to change it since i'm not certified to diagnose AS, although I was diagnosed with it in 1996 and from what me and my friend who's a psychologist think about his mannerisms and intensely strong focus towards his Football methodology(the "Team over Talent" ethos), we thought he might have Asperger's.

I'll ask my friend if he'd like to make a post on his blog about it.

Mark Magnus
If, after repeated requests, a user keeps inserting something without discussing it, the best thing to do is open an RFC. Mgm|(talk) 12:29, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Trip Ross
Thanks for looking into this, I wasn't sure. hydnjo talk 02:31, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Something is wrong with this VfD. It is red linked on the 2 June display and is not on the 2 June menu at all. I only found it by poking around. I would fix it if I knew how. ;-) hydnjo talk 02:50, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It should be at #.103 hydnjo talk 02:57, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up...though I wasn't able to ressurect it on the June 2 page I was able to get it to appear on the June 3 page.Tobycat 03:49, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

4th Grade
Hey thanks for starting the clean up on this article. Conradrock 05:40, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

lightning3006
Thank you for being supportive of my article. I found your advice to be excellent, and as soon as i get the chance, (my finals are coming next week) i will edit and add the data that would give the article sufficient background. Tank you. --69.0.61.142 04:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jigsaw Classroom
If it is now a real technique and not an experiment, then the text should be changed to reflect that and the name shoul stay the same. I know nothing about this so, if you do maybe you can fix the way it reads. Vegaswikian 23:49, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What The Muffins?
Oops, my bad. I tagged it for delete because it seemed like it was a redirect to a nonexistant page. It seems like there is a page called What The Muffins?. I'll try and fix the redirect page. Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 4 July 2005 23:51 (UTC)
 * Well, I fixed the redirect. I see now that you've tagged What The Muffins? for VfD; does that mean the redirect is automatically up for VfD? Hmm... Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 4 July 2005 23:54 (UTC)
 * Oh well, I already fixed it. Just a reminder to create the VfD subpage for What The Muffins?. Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 4 July 2005 23:56 (UTC)

Ludwik Idzikowski
Hello. I'd try to wikify Ludwik Idzikowski more... but could you tell me, what is missing there? Pibwl | ←« 7 July 2005 17:06 (UTC)

Section headers would be OK, if you think so. Pibwl | ←« 7 July 2005 23:41 (UTC)

Endurance
Thank you for the welcome and tips! I would like to move some of the stuff on the Endurance and the Expedition out of the Shackleton article, since their scope is really quite a bit larger than him - can I do this? Is there any special way? Thanks, Trollderella 7 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)

new here
Hi! Welcome to wikipedia. I'd like to suggest that you include more material on the track listings you are adding to Wikipedia. For example, an introductory sentence along the lines of: The Slaughterhouse is an album recorded by BandX by music publishing company Y in 2003." I'm guessing you have that info handy since you've already got the track names. It would be great to have added context on these articles. It would help others who may come along later to expand them further. Tobycat 8 July 2005 00:51 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nikka319"

yes, sure i didn't think about it, i'm a newbie here, and I'm Italian, i'll soon enrich the pages i started! for sure. (then i'd like to translate all for the italian wiki project ;-)

((please give some time, this evening i only tried to start contributing, in some days i'll be able to go on))

i have to take confidence with this (new for me) way of building knowledge

(sorry for my bad english, i'll surely pay more attention when writing wikipedia pages

thanks hallo nikka     --Nikka319 8 July 2005 01:04 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome -- BenStevenson 14:43, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Great,Vision
Couldn't agree more Polycarp

Geomontan
Saw that you made an edit cleaning up the all caps and sorting the stub. Do you happen to know anything about this topic? When I first saw it I thought it was a hoax but now suspect it is part of some sort of game. There is a reference too it by another article, Maxiums, created by the same user today. Google doesn't produce anything on both of these so I am still a little worried about them. Tobycat 00:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I really don't know anything about Geomontan.   ‡   Jarlaxle   00:32, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

AGP Wikipedia entry
Hi. Just noticed that you created a page for Addison Groove Project but it was removed for copyright reasons. I wanted to give rights to reprint information from our website (www.addisongroove.com) on Wikipedia. I added a note to the talk page for Addison Groove Project. I'm a part owner of the band and the keyboard player. If you need more info from me, I can be reached at rob at addisongroove.com. I love this website but I haven't done much of anything with adding entries so I'm not too sure of the exact process. The original entry that you posted is still available through google's cache (use search terms: addison groove project wikipedia) in case that's the only way to get back the work that you did. Thanks for getting the page started! (unsigned comment by 24.90.33.189)

 * I think you have me confused with somebody else. I did not start that artice or provide any content to it. Tobycat 20:17, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Democratic Underground
Thanks for pitching in at the Democratic Underground article. This anon shows up from time to time, incessantly reverting to try insert his/her POV into the article; after being met with uniform resistance, s/he goes away for a while. "Given enough eyeballs, all thugs are callow." JamesMLane 03:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my User page
''Just wanted to thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user page. That was very thoughtful. It's happened twice now and both times another wikipedian has found it and fixed it before I even saw it. That really makes me feel good about this community and what we are trying to accomplish here together. It's proof that this whole thing works! Thanks again. Tobycat 05:25, 29 July 2005 (UTC)''

Hi, my pleasure. There are a lot of us who look out for vandalism of userpages, and try to do our best to keep a friendly environment. Glad to have you, and thanks for the note. ∞ Who ? ¿ ? 05:31, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Arthur Weigall
Hi - I had forgotten to log in before posting information to the page about Arthur Weigall. I have explained on the talk page and on the Copyright_problems page that the material was legitimately posted. What happens next? Peri Hankey.

USS LIBERTY
Under normal circumdtances I would not have blanked the page. However, the entire premise of the page is an act of vandalism against wikipedia as a whole. There allready is an article on the "USS Liberty", the capitalisation merely allows propogandists to bypass that. It is an outrage. If you don't want to blank or delete the page, what I am going to do is erase the entire content (since it is entirely the worst type of POV) and put in a redirect to the USS Liberty article. jucifer 06:26, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand where you are coming from on this. I still think that the best way to go is to stick with the VfD process.  It works and it has the added benefit of being backed by the community.  Page blanking tends to upset people which gets in the way of working problems quickly to resolution.  The VfD process takes only a few days and if you are patient, it looks like the result will be to turn the page into a redirect of some sort. Tobycat 06:31, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

SERE
I blanked the text because the information is classified SECRET under federal law. It would be improper for to wait for a public discussion if the topic. I assure you it was not a test or simply vandalism. -=Tsalagi

And sorry to read about your user page being vandalized. That's just dumb.

I replaced the information with factual, open source information, which was in fact superior to the previous information, as it was both factual (i.e. not an unmitigated opinion taken from a magazine and intended to inflame) and legal. If Lee hunter insists on posting the other stuff, I will be forced to notify my superiors within the US Department of Defense. =Tsaslagi

http://www.fasolant.navy.mil/SERE/D-2G-0028.htm http://www.fasolant.navy.mil/SERE/D-2G-0032A.htm

Click on the links. Look to see where it says the courses are classified. If you could help with contacting the admins I would appreciate it. I apologize for blanking the article before, I didn't know what else to do as I am new at this. Thanks! Tsalagi

Thank you for your help and suggestions.

Awesomeness Deletion
I didn't mean to make anyone mad with this article. Please reconsider your vote for deletion. I think it is a nice addition to Wikipedia.

Thank You Brian Uphoff University of Illinois

 * 67.167.52.48 07:14, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the help
Thanks for fixing the URLs on Instant ramen museum! Osakadave 06:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping useful lines in my page.
Hi Tobycat!

Thanks for dropping useful lines in my page. I'm happy and proud to be part of the network. In the beginning I clicked 'Save page' as many times as I made changes which I regret after reading the guidelines because there is 'Preview all the time'. Anyways, thanks for the links, it was helpful to me. After I registered I haven't edited pages, yet I'm preparing more to add few more pages (new pages).

I also wonder how some people just wrote down figures which is not based on any facts but just their own assumption. I have one proof of this, once I get the clear picture I will make changes to it.

A question from a newcomer
Thanks for the welcome. How does one get the error messages regarding "clean up" and "wikification" to go away? My article on Philip Phillips appears to match other approved articles and the suggestions in the various links on the messages. I cannot figure out what is wrong. Your help is appreciated.

Stilltim 18:57, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Address to the Deil
I have written this so that it is about the poem by Robert Burns rather than a cioy of it. I would be grateful if you could have a look at it. Capitalistroadster 11:21, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Quick question
Thanks for the short semi-form message! Two quick questions, one technical, one cultural.

Technical - how do I edit a list that is an include on a page? Specifically, the list on Music of Canada in the frame on the right, it does not show up when I edit the page. I spent a fair amount of time trying to find out how to access these in the help and no luck.

Cultural - the Buck 65 page. I have been editing it, a lot! It has been re-edited from the top down to end of discography. Almost all of the "record reviews" are of records that have articles already on Wikipedia. The reviews on the Buck 65 page are far more in depth but not written in Wiki style. Should I move the reviews out into seperate articles? If I do this in stages, ie: put the reviews, unedited, and still full of bad unencyclopedic style, and then progressively fix them as time allows, is that okay etiquette? Thanks. WayeMason

Discussion regarding a VFD
Hello,

My name is Chris(tina) Hamilton and I moderate a Yahoo discussion group. We have a member by the name of Zee Charnoe who I was researching, and the "articles for deletion" came up on my Google search, so I researched and read the comments regarding 'Zeera Polyandre Charnoe'. I would be interested in what articles were deleted, and what you know from the patent information. I do believe this individual, Zee, in our group, is the same Zeera of which you speak. We have received conflicting information from this person and I would really like to find out who s(he) is. If you would like to email be privately, that is appreciated. My email is chris.hamilton2@verizon.net. Thank you for your time if you respond. Chris141.152.142.224 23:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Siberian language (2 nomination)
This stuff was undeleted... --Vladimir Volokhonsky 08:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Friends Of Shirley Partridge
Hello Tobycat. Forgive me if I am not writing this in the right place, I noticed a note you wrote on the "Friend Of Dorothy" page a while back and thought you might be a good person to lend some support to the WWII/Dorothy Parker etymology. Some friends and I tried correcting the article by noting that "Dorothy from Kansas" was not the actual source of that expression. We provided the book and documentary film "Coming Out Under Fire" as a reference, and explained about the vernacular that developed from Mrs Parkers writings during the war. However, as I'm sure you know, the "Dorothy from Kansas" theory is much more popular. I suspect this is simply because gay people developed their own theory in the absence of the actual truth, and since we do not have great access to "Gay/Lesbian" History, an alternate explanation was developed. So the problem that we're having is that as we've tried to correct the article, a small group of dedicated "editors" are trying to protect the Garland theory and relegating Dorothy Parker and WWII to second fiddle. S/He/They have now gone so far as to "protect" the page from being edited, claiming that there are countless more "references" that support the Wizard of Oz theory. The problem with this, as I see it, is that there is BOUND to me more information supporting the Wizard of Oz theory, because that is the myth that developed in the absence of the actual story. However, none of these sources explain the history of how the term was developed. In "Coming Out Under Fire" we learn that there was in fact a vernacular adopted by Gay men who used it in their communication during and after that time. So this information supercedes any "Wizard of Oz" theory, because it actually explains its actual origin. I am hoping that you may know of some reliable sources to include, and also that you will make your presence known on the discussion board there. It has become quite an uphill battle for us. Thanks!ShirleyPartridge (talk) 10:02, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

User Page
Your user page was recently vandalized by an IP address. See your history for further review. I am reporting the IP address to an admin, and warning the offender. Thanks. --InvisibleDiplomat666 (talk) 06:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  05:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

2005 film of Walt Disney pictures listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2005 film of Walt Disney pictures. Since you had some involvement with the 2005 film of Walt Disney pictures redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:5801:116F:415A:850 (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tobycat


text:
Text box

A text box is a control element of a graphical user interface, that should enable the user to input text information to be used by a program. Human Interface Guidelines recommend a single-line text box when only one line of input is required, and a multi-line text box only if more than one line of input may be required. Non-editable text boxes can serve the purpose of simply displaying text.

A typical text box is a rectangle of any size, possibly with a border that separates the text box from the rest of the interface. Text boxes may contain zero, one, or two scrollbars. Text boxes usually display a text cursor (commonly a blinking vertical line), indicating the current region of text being edited. It is common for the mouse cursor to change its shape when it hovers over a text box.

Standard functionality
Typical implementations allow a user to do the following. (The keys indicated relate to the text box widgets in Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X; similar if not identical keyboard bindings exist under the X Window System and other systems, and typically follow the same scheme as Windows.)

Enter text
When keys are pressed on a keyboard, the text appears where the caret is. Some very simple text boxes may not show a caret, which would suggest that new characters typed in will appear at the end of the current text.

Navigate and manipulate text
Using a mouse:
 * Change the caret position by clicking the desired point with a mouse cursor;
 * Select a portion of text by pressing the main mouse button while pointing the cursor at one end of the desired part of the text and dragging the cursor to the other end while holding the button pressed.

Using the keyboard:
 * Pressing arrow keys changes caret position by one character or line (in multiline text boxes);
 * Pressing Home / End keys (Microsoft's Windows OS) or Command-left arrow / Command-right arrow (Apple's Mac OS) moves the caret to the beginning / end of the line;
 * Pressing Page Up / Down moves the caret a page (the number of lines that can be displayed in the text box at a time) backward / forward (Windows) or moves the scrollbar thumb a page backward / forward without changing the caret position (Mac OS);
 * Holding the Ctrl key (Windows) while pressing arrow keys or Home / End keys makes the caret move at larger steps, e.g. words, paragraphs or beginning / end of document;
 * Holding the Option key (Mac OS) while pressing arrows moves the caret whole words or paragraphs;
 * Holding the Command key while pressing up or down arrows (Mac OS) or Holding the Ctrl key while pressing home / end (Windows) moves the caret to the beginning or end of the document;
 * Holding the shift key while changing the caret position with a mouse or keyboard selects the text between the caret position from when shift was first pressed and its current position.
 * Pressing Control-A|Ctrl+A (Windows) selects all text.

Edit text
Work in insert or overwrite mode, typically switched using Insert key. In insert mode if there is a character to the right of the caret, the new character will be inserted before it, while in overwrite mode typing a new character will replace (overwrite) the character to the right of the caret position.

Typing in a text while some part of the text already entered is selected will replace the selected text.

Delete / Backspace keys remove one character right / left of current caret position, while pressing them together with the Ctrl or command key removes one word.

Edit the text using standard clipboard operations.

Edits can be undone and redone with Ctrl+Z / Ctrl+Y (Windows) or command-Z / command-shift-Z (Mac OS)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Text box


text:
User:E23~enwiki

Hi there! I used to be a quite active wikipedian, but nowadays I'm semi-retired. I still edit a little now and then, however.

sv:Användare:E23 da:Bruger:E23 no:Bruker:E23 &

title: User:E23~enwiki


text:
Talk:Thabo Mbeki

Mbeki.
We have not a page whose title is "Mbeki". --Oremore 04:28, Dec 7, 2003 (UTC)
 * Done. --Delirium 09:13, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

What about Zanele?
I see there's nothing on wikipedia about Zanele Mbeki - surely there should be an article on South Africa's first lady. She's not in the media much, but there must be some things to say? Joziboy 26 Feb 2006, 16:54 UTC

We probably don't hear much about her because she does not have a profile inside the ANC unlike someone like Winnie Mdikizela-Mandela. But yes, I think it would be good to add an article.

role in procuring 2010 World Cup
Currently, it fails to mention one very important event, which is the FIFA world cup which was held in South Africa 2010. I believe Thabo Mbeki was instrumental bringing that wonderful event in Africa, and South Africa in particular. i have added section, but I was uncertain its location. What do you think?

title: Talk:Thabo Mbeki


text:
Aznar

Aznar is a Spanish and Gascon surname of Basque origin and an obsolete given name. It probably stems from old Basque "azenar(i)" ('fox', modern "azeri"). Notable people with this name include the following:

Surname

 * Juan Bautista Aznar-Cabañas (1860–1933), Spanish politician and prime minister briefly in 1931
 * José María Aznar (born 1953), Spanish politician, conservative prime minister
 * Emmanuel Aznar (1915–1970), French footballer
 * Manuel Aznar Acedo (1916–2001), Spanish journalist and radio broadcaster
 * Manuel Aznar Zubigaray (1894–1975), Spanish diplomat and journalist
 * Pedro Aznar (born 1959), Argentine musician

Given name

 * Aznar Sánchez (died 836), Duke of Gascony
 * Aznar Galíndez I (died 839), Count of Aragón, Conflent, Cerdagne and Urgel
 * Aznar Galíndez II (died 893), Count of Aragón

title: Aznar


text:
Talk:Symphony No. 9 (Mahler)

Many more additions must be made. Instrumentation, more description of the background, etc.

 * I've added instrumentation. Do feel free to add whatever else you can. --Camembert

"The work's ending was for many years interpreted as being a self-conscious farewell to the world—until increased knowledge of the draft of the unfinished Tenth Symphony made this interpretation untenable."

That statement is utterly ridiculous. Mahler's 10th has been well-known (and performed) for decades. There is nothing in the 10th that nullifies the interpretation that the 9th is a farewell to life. Much of the rest of what the article states is ludicrous as well. This entry needs a serious overhaul. Right now it should be taken with a grain of salt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.189.193 (talk) 04:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The new category added by Lbark
The Romantic symphonies category seems to fit, but why wouldn't the user add this to the other symphonies of Mahler? The symphony fit better under a post-romantic category. I will remove the category for now. A. Wang (talk/contrb.) 15:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

This article is a DISGRACE...
Readers should be aware that almost nothing in this article is true. The page appears to have been written by a deluded fantasist. I have deleted the first falsehood, which was a chronologial impossibility; many others remain to be corrected. A real shocker. Can we make this article 'Z-class', please...? Pfistermeister (talk) 01:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Reply: "And can you provide us some prove?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.79.104.100 (talk) 21:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Here's a QED. "Mahler was at this time a champion of the emerging avant-garde movement, most notably Arnold Schoenberg..." Really? You know, Mahler never, ever conducted any non-tonal works. He took an interest in the music and in the composers themselves, but one can hardly say he championed the music. There are all sorts of things like that in this article. I'd fix it myself but it would put me in too bad a mood. Gingermint (talk) 06:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

 * I have removed the offending sentences, as (whether true or not) they really don't/didn't belong here. As for the rest of the article....I really have no idea where to start. A real shame; this Symphony and Mahler deserve better. -- Mahlerlover1 (talk | contributions) 22:45, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Okay, I lied. I did have an idea about where to start, or at least I got one. What do you think now? Still needs work, though. Mahlerlover1 (talk | contributions) 00:18, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

MIDI
I don't think this link should be there, "Kunst der Fuge: Mahler's 9th Symphony (MIDI files)", the sound is awful. there are good record on YOU TUBE much better than this sample, with such bad sounds. It's not its place here. I took it off, and someone put it back. Denis

 * And I will continue to put it back, you vandalistic bastard. Pfistermeister (talk) 22:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

hoo, I'm very afraid, such an agressive man. You do really like this sound. I see.

He's right, this link has nothing to do here, it's just rubbish, and Wikipedia is not to advertise for commercial purpose. John

 * Why are you posting pseudonymous replies to yourself? Do you really not understand that the system *traces your postings*...? Pfistermeister (talk) 22:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

What???

look Pfistermeister: who knows everything and does not hesitate to insult anybody, this is mine: User talk:92.6.250.69

and this is the other one User talk:62.200.52.25. I happen to have some friends who are musician, I guess one of them wrote this after I told them about it. you can check yourself. So now, give me a good reason to put this link, do you own the website, do you hope to make money with this, can't you hear a difference between a good orchestra and this Midi file, if you liked Mahler, you would not want to play this kind of stupid recording, unless you are deaf, don't piss everybody off with with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.6.250.69 (talk) 09:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

 * We do not need a 'discussion' here. All that is happening is that some semi-literate fruit-cake with a bee in his bonnet about MIDI-files has decided he needs to slice a perfectly adequate link from a page -- and then gets a 'friend' to support him, posting from the same IP address! -- so that instead of us listening to MIDI he can refer us to a selection of Youtube videos every one of which is an actionable copyright violation.

 * The MIDI link is perfectly respectable and in some circumstances will be more useful than a video clip. Wikipedia does not have a policy regarding MIDI-files. The file itself is non-commercial. Removing it is vandalism, and inconveniences the normal user. It stays. Pfistermeister (talk) 16:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I can't believe this, not only did you not see that the IP was different, but you seem not capable to hear a difference between a MIDI rubbish file and a good orchestra, and besides you are talking non sense regarding the Copyright Violation,  as a musician, I do prefer people to listen to any version on You Tube than a midi file, even the orchestra I play in, and any musician think the same, except those ( you said "Bastard" I think) so bastard as you said who might be incapable of seeing a difference between a painting and a poster. by the way, I DID NOT put any You Tube link on any Mahler page, I assume people would try to find a recording by themselves, on You Tube. And the link you put HAS a commercial purpose, as it is said "Download MIDI / ZIP & sheet music books with no daily limits (from 15 euros once for all)" right at the top of the page, Are you pulling my leg? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.119.16 (talk) 22:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

 * I have nothing against MIDI files, in fact I'm quite fond of them. Whether Mahler's orchestration is a suitable subject for MIDI sequencing is another matter — in my opinion, it's not. But that's my personal point-of-view and has no bearing on the suitability of this particular link. However, what makes the link wholly unsuitable is that the MIDI files carry a copyright and, as has been observed above, the web site is thoroughly commercial. Not only do they ask for paid subscription to download ZIPed collections, they also allow only access to five MIDI files in one session. That totally fails the requirements of WP:EL. The link must be removed, and the blacklisting of this particular web site should be considered. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Look, I LOVE Mahler's 9th. It is absolutely beautiful. This article, though, is almost totally CRAP. Horrible! Can someone fix it? Let me rephrase that: Can someone who is smart fix it? Like I said a few months ago, I'd do it myself, but messing with this disaster of an article would just put me in a bad mood. And I'm grumpy enough of a person. Gingermint (talk) 05:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Since the topic of this post is MIDI, I would like to make a comment about this. I have not seen or heard the original MIDI file which had been posted here, so I cannot comment on that particular file. But I can make a general case for MIDI: a MIDI file is not supposed to be a replacement of a performance, but can be used very well for educational purposes: it shows the notes, shows the tempo, and is basically a subset of the music score. Its disadvantages are of course obvious: the standard MIDI file is limited to 16 tracks (I think that has not changed since 1990), which has the implication of limiting the number of instruments to be played. Therefore, one track in a MIDI file not necessarily corresponds to one instrument in the music score, especially not for those more complex late-Romantic ones. This unfortunately reduces the usefulness for educational purposes. Also the MIDI standard does not cover all possible things that are usually in a music score. Tempo, volume, and note duration (leading to staccato and legato) can be encoded, but trills and special playing techniques cannot be represented in a MIDI file. The most obvious disadvantage of a MIDI file is of course its awful sound. The reason for this is that MIDI does not specify the synthesizer, but relies on the user to have a synth. In most cases this is a standard preconfigured FM synthesizer from the user's soundcard, unless the user has configured his/her system with something more sophisticated. These FM-synthesis sounds are indeed awful. But even if wavetable sounds are used, the sound will not be good, for several reasons: due to a mechanical play of the same sample and its looping, fine details of the music get lost. Also, in case of the same note with the same sample being played, this causes acoustic artefacts through wave interference, leading to phasing effects which sound awful. In order to avoid this, the MIDI file creator has to take care in removing duplicate notes, which then in turn compromises the integrity of the original music representation. Due to the inability (or lazyness) of the MIDI file creator, often no expression controls are added, leading to long notes with constant volume. The same lazyness also leads to MIDI files lacking proper tempo controls, and therefore not having proper ritardando/accelerando values. These negative aspects of MIDI have prompted that MIDI files have been removed on Wikipedia. But in my opinion, this is because of wrong expectations. A MIDI file in most cases is not there to show a pleasing musical performance - only an audio recording would be able to do this. But despite the above mentioned limitations, MIDI allows an insight into the structure of a piece, into its orchestration, as it contains basically most of the information that is denoted in a music score. For conveying this information, MIDI is currently still the most cross=platform-compatible standard. Other standards such as MusicXML or similar, which would be actually better than MIDI, are not yet widespread - I am not aware of many people having a reader for such files. (There may be some work for software developers, to work on a browser plugin so that standardised music score files can be displayed and played through a web browser.) Just clicking on a MIDI file and listening to it can at least give a rough overview and understanding of the music, and when then using a MIDI editor to look at the inside of the file can reveal insights into the composition. Therefore I would plead for having MIDI files on the Wikipedia classical music pages, maybe with a disclaimer that the MIDI file does not really represent a musical performance, but is there rather for an academic study of the composition. BTW, I did post two audio music recordings on another Wikipedia Mahler page: about his Symphony No.1. The two recordings there (2nd and 3rd movement) have been entirely made with MIDI - each note is a MIDI event. Naturally this exceeds the capabilities of a "standard MIDI file", there are more than 16 tracks, and I used more than one instrument samples for each voice which allows to render different playing techniques and encapsulates basically everything that is in the score (except the glissando - I have to work on that to make it sound properly and realistically). I hope that my posting of these audio files is not seen as a commercial advertisement - I am making the recordings available for free to anyone. Reinholdbehringer (talk) 09:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

UK premiere was on 27 February 1930 by the Halle Orchestra in Manchester under Hamilton Harty (source: The Halle Tradition by Michael Kennedy) The orchestra did not play it again for over 22 years94.192.68.44 (talk) 15:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I second the above -I was at the second Halle performance in 1952. I will sleep on it, and then edit the text. Incidentally, the analysis of the first movement offered here ignores the fact that, harmonically, it resembles a rondo, in that its episodes always emphatically collapse on D.Delahays (talk) 15:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

In Popular Culture
Mahler's Ninth Symphony is referenced in St. Elmo's Fire Time: 1:19:17 You can't have the Pretenders album. - That's mine. - I bought it. You did not! You can have all the Billy Joels, Except The Stranger. I'm taking Thriller......and Mahler's Ninth. Kevin is so fond of Mahler —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.198.243.180 (talk) 09:18, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment from 173.70.131.243
Regarding the text near "The work opens with a hesitant, syncopated motif (which some, including Leonard Bernstein, have suggested is a depiction of Mahler's irregular heartbeat", states in this edit "Bernstein says it at 3:39 of this video http://www.youtube.com/v/-SjAgSo7uro&fs=1&source=uds&autoplay=1". I leave it to the regular editors of this article to determine whether the video is a reliable source and supports the text. Anomie⚔ 14:03, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

At the risk of being accused of "original research" I would suggest that this passage is, in fact, an introduction of a rather special kind - following the precedent of the "Overtura" by which Beethoven opens his Grosse Fuge. The opening of the exposition follows it, with the "lebewohl" tag. The thematic scraps which precede it are essential to the texture, as well as the imagery, of what follows.Delahays (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Without wishing -even belatedly - to be provocative, I'd now suggest that the openings of all four movements can be (even the three note trumpet phrase of the third, which is ambiguous,as much a final as an opening phrase, and exploited as both immediately in the consequent quotation and resolution of a disparate element from the opening of the second movement of the Fifth) heard as "introductory gesture (alla overtura) followed by theme " (perhaps this is one of the features which led Mahler to explain to Bruno Walter that the Ninth he was writing had most in common with the Fourth Symphony of all his others - though it was also different).Delahays (talk) 11:04, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Bruckner 9
I listened to Mahler 9 recently, and when the adagio started, I thought for a moment that I'd loaded the adagio of Bruckner 9 by mistake -- but I hadn't! Perhaps the fact that Mahler copied the opening of the corresponding movement in the corresponding symphony by Bruckner should be mentioned in the article. I haven't found much on Google, but I presume this is a tribute by Mahler to a fellow composer whom he knew and admired. Custardslice7 (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2013 (UTC) The above may point to another feature of this Ninth - that Mahler was a) fully aware of the background to the idea of a "Ninth" symphony written by a composer of his own time, b) that his own conscious self-quotations ( particularly in the Rondo Burleske) are part of a web of quotations and self-quotations which even go as far as the structure - for example Beethoven's exposition in the first movement of his Ninth veers toward B flat, which becomes an important key throughout the whole work - the first new key Mahler establishes structurally in his first movement is also B flat (I'm not sure this is original research, either).Delahays (talk) 10:28, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Deems Taylor
This quotation is presented as merely being "less favourable". It is also dated, and expresses a view no serious music writer would now espouse. Perhaps some historical context could be added here? Stevouk (talk) 12:06, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I would not think that there is a historical context to one's sole opinions. And what do you mean that the quotation is not one a "serious music writer" would "now" deem fit? Are you trying to say that the views on the symphony nowadays is not relevant to this quotation? If so, could you verify that with sources? Thanks. NetHelper (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Taylor's quote is from 1932 (one year after its US premiere) which by any measure puts it into the historical category - not that this is obvious from the main text. I'm stumped to find anything remotely comparable and recent, so as such, sources are tricky. --Stevouk (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Copyright Violation in Mahler 9:3rd Movement
Dear editors,

The section for the 3rd movement of Mahler 9 has been removed due to a possible copy-and-paste copyright violation issue. Please do not edit the blanked section until further notice. If you are a OTRS Agent, Copyright Clerk, or otherwise just an administrator, please leave a message on my talk page to discuss possible solutions. The article has been added to the Copyright violations page: April 21.

NetHelper (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * NetHelper, thank you for identifying the issue. It has been resolved in accordance with copyright policy. See below for the specific remedy applied. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.gustav-mahler.eu/index.php/werken/95-symphony-no-9/858-movement-3-rondo-burleske-allegro-assai-sehr-trotzig. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: Earlier content of the tagged section has been restored. See the copyright listing: 21 April 2018. Some of the content in the section clearly evolved within the article, as it was present from very early in the article's history and in nascent form. However, after the identified 19 January 2015 creation of the external site, this article was modified to match. Since this is inconsistent with our copyright policy, the form of the article that existed prior to the creation of the 19 January 2015 source has been restored. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Section on "Mahler's death"
There are at least two seriously misleading statements in this brief section. 1) Mahler's heart condition had been with him from his birth, through a very strenuous life filled with hard work. The discovery of it in the summer of 1907 (through a routine medical examination) was an unpleasant surprise, but there is no evidence that it was progressively fatal in itself. Mahler could have lived with it until the age of eighty without any real trouble, as far as doctprs were concerned it was a "sleeper condition", not an active disease grinding down his health.

2) Mahler stopped work on his draft for the 10th symhony around September 1910, and seems not to have clocked any substantial work on it afterwards (no doubt he was hoping to return to it in the summer of 1911). At this point he was busy with two things, first off, the grand premiere of his 8th Symphony at Munich in October - a big event with famous musicians, composers and writers frpm all over Europe in attendance - and then preparing his 1910-11 New York season. But he also undertook some revisions of the score for the 9th (this is mentioned in several biographies, for example Peter Franklin's eminent The Life of Mahler and La Grange's great biography, and also in the article on the 10th here at Wikipedia). So he left the score for the 10th to rest at that point and never worked on it again. The wording of the article here suggests the melodramatic notion that he was working on it in a race against ill-health and impending death right up to his passing in May 1911, which is nonsense. 188.150.64.57 (talk) 03:33, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Symphony No. 9 (Mahler)


text:
Category mistake

A category mistake (or category error, categorical mistake, or mistake of category), is a semantic or ontological error in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category, or, alternatively, a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property. An example is a person learning that the game of cricket involves team spirit, and after being given a demonstration of each player's role, asking which player performs the "team spirit".

History
The term "category-mistake" was introduced by Gilbert Ryle in his book The Concept of Mind (1949) to remove what he argued to be a confusion over the nature of mind born from Cartesian metaphysics. Ryle argues that it is a mistake to treat the mind as an object made of an immaterial substance because predications of substance are not meaningful for a collection of dispositions and capacities.

The phrase is introduced in the first chapter. The first example is of a visitor to Oxford. The visitor, upon viewing the colleges and library, reportedly inquires, "But where is the University?" The visitor's mistake is presuming that a University is part of the category "units of physical infrastructure," rather than that of an "institution". Ryle's second example is of a child witnessing the march-past of a division of soldiers. After having had battalions, batteries, squadrons, etc. pointed out, the child asks when is the division going to appear. "The march-past was not a parade of battalions, batteries, squadrons and a division; it was a parade of the battalions, batteries and squadrons of a division." (Ryle's italics) His third example is of a foreigner being shown a cricket match. After being pointed out batsmen, bowlers and fielders, the foreigner asks: "who is left to contribute the famous element of team-spirit?" He goes on to argue that the Cartesian dualism of mind and body rests on a category mistake.

title: Category mistake


text:
Talk:Peter Dodds McCormick

Untitled
Further to what I said about no image of McCormick being available - can anyone anyone locate one? Google's image search could not assist at all.

It must be said that it is amazing how hard it is to find out information about him. I haven't yet found any information on his family, I've gone through a couple of Australian encyclopedias and found that they do not mention him. His early years are very shadowy. Arno 04:42, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Advance-australia-fair.jpg
Image:Advance-australia-fair.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Counter claim for John Macfarlane
The Australian Dictionary of Biography article on Peter Dodds McCormick says:

 * Subsequently a descendant of John Macfarlane (d.1866) claimed that Macfarlane had originally composed the music and written the first verse. Some musicologists consider the tune to be based on a typical 'wandering melody', a theory given some credence by McCormick's ease and method of composition. It seems, however, that there is little doubt that McCormick was responsible for 'Advance Australia Fair'—certainly his contemporaries accepted his bona fides.

I also have a cutting from ABC Radio 24 Hours magazine (now known as Limelight) from May 2001, an article called "Advance Australia Where?", by Annie Patrick, which says:

 * The attitudes inherent in the former lyrics are perhaps not surprising, given the song was first published in 1878 by John Macfarlane under the pseudonym Amicus. According to the National Library, Macfarlane could have written the words and music long before 1878, with the name Amicus being formed from the names of his daughters: Agnes, Mary Isabella and Catherine.  This refutes the commonly held belief that Peter Cormick (a pupil and friend of Macfarlane) was the anthem’s author.

A couple of comments. Firstly, Macfarlane apparently died in 1866, so whoever published the song in 1878, it wasn't Macfarlane. Annie Patrick seems to believe he was still alive in 1878. I guess what she's getting at is that someone took Mcfarlane's song, published it pseudonymously, then later claimed ownership of the pseudonym. Secondly, this completely flies in the face of McCormick’s own words in 1913 describing how he wrote the song all by himself. But I'm curious as to why he used a pseudonym at all, and in particular, why one that just happened to be formed from Macfarlane's daughter's initials? Was this just a coincidence, or was he paying a compliment to his old friend and teacher, or was he cryptically acknowledging the true author? There’s nothing else I can find about Macfarlane on a google search. Does anyone know anything about the National Library’s opinion on this matter, and what documents they may hold that shed any light on the claim for Macfarlane? -- JackofOz (talk) 00:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Clearly, Annie Patrick didn't know what she was talking about. There was no secret in 1878 that Amicus was P.D. McCormick. Where she got the idea that it was Macfarlane, who had been dead for 12 years, is anyone's guess. Regarding the choice of Amicus, Amicus is latin for "friend". Obviously, the implication is that McCormick felt himself to be a friend and Amicus is a lot easier to write than P.D. McCormick. As for the silliness about Amicus and the names of Macfarlane's daughters, I shouldn't need to point out that the daughters' first initials spell AMIC, not Amicus. They also spell Mica, cami (as in camisole) etc. The relationship to "Amicus" is barely a coincidence, it's more a stretch of the imagination than anything else. I've spoken to the National Library and they have no doubt that McCormick was the author. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:11, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks. Yes, I aware that Amicus means friend, and I was hypothesising that McCormick was engaging in a double reference to Macfarlane - his friend - through a name that connects him not just with Macfarlane but also his with the daughters.  Put that together with the claims Macfarlane's family have made that he was the true author and you might have something worth investigating.  Anyway, it seems that Annie Patrick is barking up the wrong tree.  But I'd still like to see something about whatever evidence the Macfarlanes have for their claim.  --  JackofOz (talk) 04:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Birth Date
In the January 2012 edition of the QANTAS in-flight magazine, there is a story about Advance Australia Fair and it mentions that a descendant of McCormick is writing a biography of him. She mentions that his date of birth was January 21, 1834. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.215.176.150 (talk) 09:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

 * I'd be interested in reading that biog.
 * The date conflicts with the edit I've just reverted that claimed, without any authority, he was born on 11 February 1833. Where do people come up with this crap?  --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  00:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My grandfather was a strong supporter of Advance Australia Fair, so much so that Amicus sought him out on more than one occasion to explain the circumstances surrounding the creation of the song. The postcards that Amicus sent my grandfather, as well as the letter that is quoted from in this article, are in the manuscripts section of the National Library in Canberra. As far as I'm aware, from the reams of paperwork that my father left me, Amicus didn't know his actual birthdate, or at least kept it a closely guarded secret. Any specific birthdate should be regarded as especially dubious. -- AussieLegend ( ✉ ) 10:34, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:52, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Petermccormick.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Peter Dodds McCormick (1833-1916) portrait.jpg

title: Talk:Peter Dodds McCormick