User talk:Opera Snob#top

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:3}}|Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC}}

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Georgi Nelepp, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Based on Georgii Nelepp and Paul Kwilecki, I see that you are using an unmaintainable reference style. If you use the tags for your references, you will have references automatically numbered. Please see, at least, the introductory document referencing for beginners on how to do this. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:59, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading :File:Georgii Nelepp as Sobinin (center stage) in the opera Ivan Susanin 1941.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:29, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading :File:Georgii Nelepp in costume for his role as Sadko in the opera Sadko.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:30, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading :File:Georgii Nelepp publicity shot in street clothes.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:30, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading :File:Photo of Georgii Nelepp in costume for his role as Gherman in Tchaikoski's opera The Queen of Spades.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:38, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Copyright-problem.svg

Thank you for uploading :File:Georgii Nelepp.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=Opera_Snob}} a list of your uploads].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear JJMC89,

After an academic career of 34 years,I certainly understand the importance of copyright, and you are right to be so careful. The posting of the picture of Georgii Nelepp on his article was approved by Nathan Tang, who handled the ticket. I have been trying for about a year to get this picture up and have followed the instructions on the Wikipedia page you mention as well as others (see below) and have gotten advice from multiple Wikipedia agents.

I have already filled out the upload form providing what I think is what you want. The appropriate copyright tag is Non-free promotional

{{Non-free promotional}}—for publicity photographs of people or events, such as headshots or posed shots, from a press kit. The picture is owned by the Bolshoi Theater in Russia and held in their museum. It is a publicity shot of Nelepp, a tenor star 1944-1957, available in their commemoration of his 110th birthday at http://www.bolshoyrussia.com/news/?year=digest&newsid=1110.

In one of my submissions I presented the following: "This use of this non-free photograph meets all 10 of the 10 Fair Use Criteria .

1. No free equivalent: None that I have been able to locate. Nelepp died in 1957. Since then, I doubt the Bolshoi Theater has had cause to release this picture (or any picture of Nelepp) as a free image.

2. Respect for commercial opportunities: Original market role of the image was to sell tickets to Nelepp’s performances. This ended when he died in 1957. I can’t think of a way the Bolshoi Theater could make money today through this image. They consign it to their Museum.

3. Minimal usage:

(a) Minimal number of items: One

(b) Minimal extent of use: The picture will appear only once. I don’t know whether the image has a high or low resolution by Wiki standards, but it could be posted at a lower resolution than the original.

4. Previous publication: Originally published by the Bolshoi Theater to advertise Georgii Nelepp’s performances (1944-1957).

5. Content: The use of the image will be encyclopedic, a depiction of the subject of the Wikipedia article on Georgii Nelepp. The article meets Wikipedia contents standards . The addition of the picture will not affect this.

6. Media-specific policy: Use of image meets the Wiki standards of image use .

A publicity photo, the image neither demeans the subject, was unfairly obtained, nor intrudes upon his privacy.

7. One article minimum: The image will be used in the Georgii Nelepp article.

8. Contextual significance: The Georgii Nelepp article is biographical; a photograph of him will put a face on biographical facts, significantly improving the article.

9. Restrictions on location: The image will be used only on the page of the Georgii Nelepp article.

10. Image description page:

(a) Source: Image found on Bolshoi Theater website in commemoration of Georgii Nelepp’s 110th birthday: https://www.bolshoirussia.com/news/?year=digest&newsid=1110. The photographer is unknown, but was employed by the Bolshoi Theater to publicize opera stars at some time between 1944-1957 (when Nelepp performed there). The photo of Nelepp in street clothes appears (on the above webpage) with pictures of Nelepp in costume for roles he sang.

(b) Copyright tag: “{{Non-free promotional}}—for publicity photographs of people or events, such as headshots or posed shots, from a press kit” .

(c) Name of each article: “Geogii Nelepp” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgii_Nelepp.

The picture will enable readers to understand more fully the biography presented in the article. It is presently held by the Bolshoi Theater Museum and has been used by them to commemorate the work of this Soviet star. The use in Wikipedia will likewise provide information about this tenor."

What must I do to get the picture up again?

I know how busy you must be so thanks for your attention! Susan Opera Snob (talk) 03:42, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Opera Snob (talk) 18:29, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading :File:Georgii Nelepp in street clothes, Bolshoi Theater publicity shot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:38, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Voceditenore, I apologize for not understanding Wikipedia impermanence. I have carefully read the policies on Verifiability, Reliable sources, No original research, and Correct use of external links.

I am happy to add retrieval dates; it will improve the piece. Following your lead, I am prepared to insert the most recent retrieval dates. I’m likewise grateful for the Grove reference. Unfortunately, I cannot comprehend some of your notes due to unfamiliar abbreviations. Of the cuts I grasped, I ask you to reconsider some that perhaps are not obligatory and adversely affect the quality of the article.

To be honest, I felt insulted by some of your corrections that assume I cannot distinguish reliable from unreliable sources or personal opinion from fact [such as (1) and (2) below]. My academic publications suggest otherwise. I’m not uncooperative, just hurt.

(1) “Remove patently false sentence”: Your notes do not identify the sentence. Perhaps you mean “Competing with a thousand applicants for admission to the Conservatory, Nelepp won one of seven openings.” It reports the results of competition for limited seats in an elite school. Why is it not only “false” but “patently false”?

To support the sentence, I offer three early recognitions of Nelepp’s talent from Russian musical authorities of his day: the director of the Leningrad Conservatory (who auditioned Nelepp), a renowned tenor, and a music critic.

This is not “personal commentary,” as you label it.

The “patently false sentence” came from contemporary Russian tenor Sergei Givargizova in an Orpheus Radio documentary on Nelepp. Dedicated to publicizing classical music, Orpheus uses a large wide-ranging music library; interactions with Russian and worldwide orchestras, soloists, and other music performers; and the arrangement of concerts and recordings. The Nelepp documentary belongs to a series on 20th c. noteworthy singers. It counts as a “reliable” source by Wikipedia standards. “Reliable sources may be . . . authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sourcesVoceditenore). I assume that “authors” may include experts presenting material in a documentary.

Of course, you may have evidence that the sentence is indeed false. If not, I would like to use it to delineate the process through which Nelepp moved from soldier to opera singer.

(2) “Better source needed”: You mistrust both of the Russian documentaries I use. One is the aforementioned radio broadcast. The other, “Georgi Nelepp: Soviet Opera Star,” was made in 1987 by Kultura, a Russian television network that specializes in the arts. The film includes interviews with the archivist of the Nelepp collection in the Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts, a Bolshoi Theater historian, and a soprano and a director who worked with Nelepp. Why does article material from these Russian documentaries need a “better source”?

(3) Deletion of former reference #3, a list of sources used in the article (such as a monograph on the Stalin Prize and recollections from two of Nelepp’s directors): These sources are the credentials of the article and orient readers to the material that follows. Why delete the list?

(4) Deletion of former reference #31, links to videos and soundtracks of Nelepp’s performances: Removing the performance links deprives readers of a direct path to the opera singing that justifies a Wikipedia article. I know you manage copyrights for Wikipedia but nevertheless want to address the matter from my academic copyright experience.

Please note that the Nelepp article provides only links within a reference, not the “click here” videos on some article pages. Sorry, I don’t know the technical name for this arrangement, but the Wikipedia article on Caruso contains three of them, The Bartered Bride entry, four.

I think the footnoted Nelepp performance links are analogous to a bibliography containing the names of copyrighted books. Both are lists of sources. Neither incorporates copyrighted material. The bibliography does not violate the copyrights of copyrighted books on it; a list of sites containing Nelepp’s music does not violate the copyrights of linked videos. Links are not copyrighted.

The 19th c. Russian operas are public domain (https://iclg.com/practice-areas/copyright-laws-and-regulations/russia). I’ll delete the link to Shapiro’s The Decembrists.

The opportunity to hear Nelepp sing, in my view, is too important to relegate to external links. In any case, Wikipedia policy dictates that “Links in the ‘External links’ section should be kept to a minimum.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links).

(5) Deletion of former reference #30, two links to pictures of Nelepp in costume or street clothes: One leads to five pictures in the Bolshoi Theater Museum’s commemoration of his 110 birthday. The other accesses a small collection of photos from various Russian sources. Directing readers to sites that present copyrighted images does not, in my understanding, violate the copyrights of those images. Again, links are not copyrighted.

Perhaps I should add that the publicity shot of Nelepp on the article page has been recently accepted as fair use by a Wikipedia administrator. I wrote an argument using the Wikipedia 10 criteria of fair use.

(6) Deletion of former reference #8, links to social media and forum discussions of Nelepp’s alleged career as a Stalin informant: This is a controversial and important part of his legacy. Both sites (a forum in Kino Theater’s Nelepp entry and a vk.com discussion of Nelepp) contain sympathetic responses to Nelepp even in the KGB context.

In the recent Teahouse discussion of Nelepp references, Tenryuu wrote, “social media discussions are not seen as reliable independent sources.” However, I’m not using these discussions as reliable independent sources of fact. I am not weighing them to determine, say, whether Nelepp did indeed work for the KGB. Rather I am invoking the discussions as expressions of fan sentiment, specifically a respect for Nelepp regardless of his possible secretive work for Stalin.

Vishnevskaya’s account of the spitting incident presents a characterization of Nelepp as an informant. However, there is a more recent depiction. A blanket prohibition of social media sources regardless of their usage leaves me inaccurately with only Vishnevskaya.

(6) “Remove ref to Wikipedia”: My reference was to the Georgi Nelepp article in Russian Wikipedia. Why can’t I refer to the “free encyclopedic” treatment of Nelepp in his homeland?

Thank you for considering my views as author. What’s the next step in the collaborative editing process? Also, what is the meaning of the alphabet letters you inserted before some of the references? Opera Snob (talk) 19:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Voceditenore, I apologize for not understanding Wikipedia impermanence. I have carefully read the policies on Verifiability, Reliable sources, No original research, and Correct use of external links.

I am happy to add retrieval dates; it will improve the piece. Following your lead, I am prepared to insert the most recent retrieval dates. I’m likewise grateful for the Grove reference. Unfortunately, I cannot comprehend some of your notes due to unfamiliar abbreviations. Of the cuts I grasped, I ask you to reconsider some that perhaps are not obligatory and adversely affect the quality of the article.

To be honest, I felt insulted by some of your corrections that assume I cannot distinguish reliable from unreliable sources or personal opinion from fact [such as (1) and (2) below]. My academic publications suggest otherwise. I’m not uncooperative, just hurt.

(1) “Remove patently false sentence”: Your notes do not identify the sentence. Perhaps you mean “Competing with a thousand applicants for admission to the Conservatory, Nelepp won one of seven openings.” It reports the results of competition for limited seats in an elite school. Why is it not only “false” but “patently false”?

To support the sentence, I offer three early recognitions of Nelepp’s talent from Russian musical authorities of his day: the director of the Leningrad Conservatory (who auditioned Nelepp), a renowned tenor, and a music critic. This is not “personal commentary,” as you label it.

The “patently false sentence” came from contemporary Russian tenor Sergei Givargizova in an Orpheus Radio documentary on Nelepp. Dedicated to publicizing classical music, Orpheus uses a large wide-ranging music library; interactions with Russian and worldwide orchestras, soloists, and other music performers; and the arrangement of concerts and recordings. The Nelepp documentary belongs to a series on 20th c. noteworthy singers. It counts as a “reliable” source by Wikipedia standards. “Reliable sources may be . . . authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sourcesVoceditenore). I assume that “authors” may include experts presenting material in a documentary.

Of course, you may have evidence that the sentence is indeed false. If not, I would like to use it to delineate the process through which Nelepp moved from soldier to opera singer.

(2) “Better source needed”: You mistrust both of the Russian documentaries I use. One is the aforementioned radio broadcast. The other, “Georgi Nelepp: Soviet Opera Star,” was made in 1987 by Kultura, a Russian television network that specializes in the arts. The film includes interviews with the archivist of the Nelepp collection in the Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts, a Bolshoi Theater historian, and a soprano and a director who worked with Nelepp. Why does article material from these Russian documentaries need a “better source”?

(3) Deletion of former reference #3, a list of sources used in the article (such as a monograph on the Stalin Prize and recollections from two of Nelepp’s directors): These sources are the credentials of the article and orient readers to the material that follows. Why delete the list?

(4) Deletion of former reference #31, links to videos and soundtracks of Nelepp’s performances: Removing the performance links deprives readers of a direct path to the opera singing that justifies a Wikipedia article. I know you manage copyrights for Wikipedia but nevertheless want to address the matter from my academic copyright experience.

Please note that the Nelepp article provides only links within a reference, not the “click here” videos on some article pages. Sorry, I don’t know the technical name for this arrangement, but the Wikipedia article on Caruso contains three of them, The Bartered Bride entry, four.

I think the footnoted Nelepp performance links are analogous to a bibliography containing the names of copyrighted books. Both are lists of sources. Neither incorporates copyrighted material. The bibliography does not violate the copyrights of copyrighted books on it; a list of sites containing Nelepp’s music does not violate the copyrights of linked videos. Links are not copyrighted.

The 19th c. Russian operas are public domain (https://iclg.com/practice-areas/copyright-laws-and-regulations/russia). I’ll delete the link to Shapiro’s The Decembrists.

The opportunity to hear Nelepp sing, in my view, is too important to relegate to external links. In any case, Wikipedia policy dictates that “Links in the ‘External links’ section should be kept to a minimum.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links).

(5) Deletion of former reference #30, two links to pictures of Nelepp in costume or street clothes: One leads to five pictures in the Bolshoi Theater Museum’s commemoration of his 110 birthday. The other accesses a small collection of photos from various Russian sources. Directing readers to sites that present copyrighted images does not, in my understanding, violate the copyrights of those images. Again, links are not copyrighted.

Perhaps I should add that the publicity shot of Nelepp on the article page has been recently accepted as fair use by a Wikipedia administrator. I wrote an argument using the Wikipedia 10 criteria of fair use.

(5) Deletion of former reference #8, links to social media and forum discussions of Nelepp’s alleged career as a Stalin informant: This is a controversial and important part of his legacy. Both sites (a forum in Kino Theater’s Nelepp entry and a vk.com discussion of Nelepp) contain sympathetic responses to Nelepp even in the KGB context.

In the recent Teahouse discussion of Nelepp references, Tenryuu wrote, “social media discussions are not seen as reliable independent sources.” However, I’m not using these discussions as reliable independent sources of fact. I am not weighing them to determine, say, whether Nelepp did indeed work for the KGB. Rather I am invoking the discussions as expressions of fan sentiment, specifically a respect for Nelepp regardless of his possible secretive work for Stalin.

Vishnevskaya’s account of the spitting incident presents a characterization of Nelepp as an informant. However, there is a more recent depiction. A blanket prohibition of social media sources regardless of their usage leaves me inaccurately with only Vishnevskaya.

(6) “Remove ref to Wikipedia”: My reference was to the Georgi Nelepp article in ''Russian Wikipedia. Why can’t I refer to the “free encyclopedic” treatment of Nelepp in his homeland?

Thank you for considering my views as author. What’s the next step in the collaborative'' editing process? Also, what is the meaning of the alphabet letters you inserted before some of the references?