User talk:RobertG
Archives Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page (click here). I will typically respond on yours, although if it appears the discussion would be better kept in one place then I am likely to respond here.
Please remember the five pillars and, in particular, please be civil.
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
Happy First Edit Day!
[edit] | Happy First Edit Day! Hi RobertG! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |  |
On the Messiaen article
[edit]I saw what you said when you reverted my edit on the Messiaen article. And sure, I agree with you - but the point of my edit was really to put that sentence at the bottom of that paragraph, as I felt the info it conveyed wasn't as "important" as some of the other info in that paragraph. Because I looked up "Messiaen" and the little Wikipedia blurb Google showed me said: "Olivier Eugène Prosper Charles Messiaen was a French composer, organist, and ornithologist who was one of the major composers of the 20th century. His music is rhythmically complex." And I thought, that's kind of a lame blurb, isn't it? Sure, it's not wrong, but I'm sure he wasn't the only composer whose music was rhythmically complex. And what YOU said seems to agree: "It 'is' complex, but on the whole I would say it's less rhythmically complex than a lot of 20th- and 21st-century music." Meanwhile, Messiaen's modes of limited transposition were something that were a lot more unique to him as a composer. So I thought if, by moving the original sentence to the bottom of the paragraph (if it even really needs to be in there at all, honestly), that Google as a result might instead include the bit about his limited modes of transposition when you look him up.
Guess I just thought I'd let you know my side of things. Hope you'll understand. Benny the Bouncer (talk) 21:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. Thanks for the explanation -- it makes total sense. Now that I understand what you were trying to achieve, I agree with you about the lame ending to that blurb. I thought to myself, "so what would be the most important thing to add there?" My answer was: his importance and influence as a teacher. So I suggested a reorganisation of the lead here in light of that. I'll watch how that affects the Google blurb. I'd be interested to know what you think. Feel free to suggest other improvements! And thanks again. RobertG ♬ talk 15:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, thanks for doing that. Yeah, the bit about him being a teacher totally works, too. Thanks again for understanding. Benny the Bouncer (talk) 00:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
[edit] | |
| Four years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello
[edit]Hi 😸 i don't know you but i like to say hello Gdfctjmm (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Anime-influenced Western animation has been nominated for merging
[edit]
Category:Anime-influenced Western animation has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Paul_012 (talk) 18:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi RobertG. Thank you for your work on Kate Lethbridge-Stewart. Another editor, Aszx5000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Very well constructed article - great job !
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Aszx5000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Aszx5000 (talk) 14:18, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Category:Oils and fats technologies has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Oils and fats technologies has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 12:07, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of List of Fawlty Towers cast members for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fawlty Towers cast members until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.--woodensuperman 11:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in a research
[edit]Hello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Kind Regards,
BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research
[edit]Hello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Take the survey here.
Kind Regards,