User talk:Belvdme

Please read WP:COI. Thanks. AlistairMcMillan 22:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

• Abramson, Armand R. A Better Use of the Clarinet Choir, The Instrumentalist 19 (October 1964): 67-70.
• Ayres, Thomas A. Clarinet Choir Literature. The Instrumentalist 18 (April 1964): 83-85.
• Bellison, Simeon. The Clarinet Ensemble. New York: Simeon Bellison, 1945.
• Borkowski, Francis. An Approach to Blending on the Clarinet. The Instrumentalist 18 (January 1964): 85-86.
• Cailliet, Lucien. The Clarinet and Clarinet Choir. Kenosha, Wisconsin: Leblanc Publications, Inc., 1955.
• Cailliet, Lucien. The Need for Adequate Instrumentation. Music Journal 26 (December 1968): 47.
• De Jesu, James. Improved Clarinet Sections Via Choirs. The Instrumentalist 7 (October 1952): 26.
• Gilbert, Richard. Clarinetists Discography II. New York: The Grenadilla Society, 1975.
• Gilbert, Richard. The Clarinetists Solo Repetoire. New York: The Grenadilla Society, 1972.
• Gillespie, James E. Solos for Unaccompanied Clarinet: An Annotated Bibliography of Published Works. Detroit: Gillespie, 1973.
• Heim, Norman. Clarinet Choir Potpourri. Woodwind World Brass and Percussion 19 (May-June 1980): 14-16.
• Heim, Norman. The Clarinet Choir. The Instrumentalist 39 (February 1985): 32-35.
• Heim, Norman. The Clarinet Choir. Woodwind World Brass and Percussion 14 (April 1975): 8-14.
• Heim, Norman. The Clarinet Choir and Its Emerging Repertoire. Woodwind World Brass and Percussion 16 (November 1977): 6-7.
• Heim, Norman. The Clarinet Choir Phenomenon. The Instrumentalist 34 (November 1979): 29-33.
• Howland, Russell S. The Clarinet Choir-Its Development and Use. The Instrumentalist 18 (November 1963): 78.
• Jennings, Vance. The Clarinet Choir Movement. National Association Of College Wind and Percussion Instructors Bulletin 11:4 (March 1963)
• Jones, Marquis E. Clarinet Choir: An Emerging Art Form. Music Journal 26 (October 1968): 68-71.
• Lamneck, Esther E. Survey of the Music for Two Clarinets, Published ca. 1780-1825, by the Clarinetist-Composers Blasius, Lefevre, Michael, and Vanderhagen (D.M.A. diss., The Juilliard

School, 1980).

• Morgan, John. The History of the Clarinet Choir. The Instrumentalist 21 (February 1967): 42-43.
• Palanker, Edward S. The Towson State College Clarinet Choir., Woodwind World Brass and Percussion 14 (April 1975): 22.
• Randall, David Max. A Comprehensive Performance Project in Clarinet Literature with an Essay on the Clarinet Duet from ca.1715 to ca.1825 (D.M.A. diss., The University of Iowa, 1970).
• Scruggs, Tina Gina Adkisson. An Annotated Bibliography of Original Music for Solo Clarinet Published Between 1972 and 1977 (D.M. diss., The Florida State University, 1992).
• Weerts, Richard. The Clarinet Choir. Journal of Research in Music Education 12:3 (Fall 1964): 227-230.
• Weerts, Richard. The Clarinet Choir as a Functional Ensemble. The Instrumentalist 23 (March 1969): 55-61.
• Weerts, Richard. The Clarinet Choir in the Modern Concert Band. Music Journal 23 (December 1965): 47.
• Weiner, Lowell Barry. The Unaccompanied Clarinet Duet Repertoire from 1825 to the Present: An Annotated Catalog (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1980).
• Wilkins, Wayne. The Index of Clarinet Music. Magnolia, Arkansas: Music Register, 1975.

Hi. Wikipedia's category system uses subcategories to keep main categories from getting too unwieldy. When categories get to certain sizes, they're split into multiple subcategories, and articles are put in the subcategories if at all possible, and not kept redundantly in the main parent category after being filed into the sub-categories. There are some exceptions for cases where the subcategory isn't really a strict subcategory, but the "nationality" and "style" subcategorizations aren't usually considered among them. See Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories for details. --Delirium 00:53, 5 October 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you for uploading Image:ViennaConnection.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 13:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Thanks for uploading Image:FranzKrommer.jpg . I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self }} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 13:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

You're the copyright holder of Image:FranzKrommer.jpg ?? (person deceased more than 100 years ago does not free duplication of images make, not everywhere, and not if one does not know the source of the image. As I learned in another context yesterday. Info about the image can be very important.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 23:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Point one. Not my call. Point two. The information does not go in my talk page- it goes in the image page: this is a community. The tag needs to be modified to reflect (PD-100 only or what have you - not GFDL-self, since the text refers to the image- unless you insert a comment "my claim of copyright applies to the scan only" etc.) In rather a hurry, hence tone. Thank you. Schissel | Sound the Note! 17:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

I notice that you have twice reverted edits to this article that remove the stub tag. I believe it is not a stub article for three reasons

• According to WP:STUB a stub article contains only a few sentances. This article contains more than a few.
• at WP:WSS a bot tags all articles shorter than 512 bytes as stubs. This article is over 13000 bytes
• The talk page template has it classed as start class.

If you feel that it is still a stub article may I suggest replacing bio-stub with UK-musician-stub, woodwind-musician-stub and classical-musician-stub where I feel it is more likely to find editors interested in these areas. I will not remove the tag but if it is still there in a week I will change it. Waacstats 11:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

the guidelines - not rules, but more or less consensus - are given out on this page Wikipedia:Categorization_and_subcategories and should be looked at. Rule 3.4 makes good sense but especially if there are many subcategories to go through. I should have checked; if there are many clarinetist subcats, then by all means let it stay. (But also by all means read the link content.) Thanks Schissel | Sound the Note! 23:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

A tag has been placed on Michael Collins (musician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon }} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Simple Paradox 20:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Belvdme, the mainspace is not the right place for the comment that you made. If you believe that Michael Collins (musician) is notable then please construct the article again, but add verifiable sources for the information in the article establishing said notability. I know it can be frustrating sometimes, but hang in there. Cheers. --Simple Paradox 20:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

An editor has nominated Piet Jeegers, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piet Jeegers and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

A tag has been placed on Eddy Daniels requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon }} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Mooshykris (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you for asking. Yes, I think I can: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stefanovic_performing_Copland.JPG. A few years ago I was also told by M. Stefanovic that he had a letter from Copland regarding this Concerto, but, unfortunately, I have never got a copy of it.

By the way, as I can see, you are a clarinetist, i.e. we are colleagues. Can you tell me something more about yourself - are you studying somewhere, or teaching, performing?--Andrija (talk) 21:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]