Hi Hammero! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Theopolisme (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, which sort of presentation would you prefer? Like this:

Examples:
London: „Composers' Weekend“, 1981
Darmstadt: Darmstädter Ferienkurse, 1984 and 1986
Como: „18° festival internazionale, autunno musicale“, 1984
Milan: „Musica del nostro tempo“, 1987
Freiburg: „Horizonte Reihe“, 1984
Paris: „Perspectives du XXe siècle“ (Carte blanche a Harry Halbreich), 1985
Stockholm: „International Festival of Electronic Music“, 1985
Freiburg: „Aventure Freiburg“, 1987
Mönchengladbach: „Ensemblia Festival“, 1987
Cologne: Weltmusiktage der IGNM, 1987
Frankfurt: Hessischer Rundfunk, 1988
Los Angeles: Arnold Schoenberg Institute, 1989
Witten: Wittener Tage für neue Musik, 1994
Basel: IGNM Basel, 1995
Piteå: Piteå University, 1995
Bremen: Festival „Transit“ Orte/NichtOrte, 1999
Montreal: World Saxophone Congress, 2000

or like this?

Examples

• London: „Composers' Weekend“, 1981
• Darmstadt: Darmstädter Ferienkurse, 1984 and 1986
• Como: „18° festival internazionale, autunno musicale“, 1984
• Milan: „Musica del nostro tempo“, 1987
• Freiburg: „Horizonte Reihe“, 1984
• Paris: „Perspectives du XXe siècle“ (Carte blanche a Harry Halbreich), 1985
• Stockholm: „International Festival of Electronic Music“, 1985
• Freiburg: „Aventure Freiburg“, 1987
• Mönchengladbach: „Ensemblia Festival“, 1987
• Cologne: Weltmusiktage der IGNM, 1987
• Frankfurt: Hessischer Rundfunk, 1988
• Los Angeles: Arnold Schoenberg Institute, 1989
• Witten: Wittener Tage für neue Musik, 1994
• Basel: IGNM Basel, 1995
• Piteå: Piteå University, 1995
• Bremen: Festival „Transit“ Orte/NichtOrte, 1999
• Montreal: World Saxophone Congress, 2000

Greetings, --Goliath613 (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are closely affiliated with the topics you have written about at Civilización o Barbarie and Bernardo Kuczer, you should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. Writing about yourself or your accomplishments is strongly discourage as it is very difficult to retain the proper neutrality when writing about such topics. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I am not Bernardo Kuczer. I only helped the musicologist Goliath613 uploadding files for the page and the english texts etc. I had never before uploaded visual material and did several mistakes in the tagging. We have contacted the owner so that he is also sending permissions to the wiki. Thanks for pointing out the mistakes. --Hammero (talk) 17:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like to ask you to be as kind as to remove the template of the biography of Bernardo Kuczer. I have explained to you what the mistakes were, that lead you to think I might be him.If you think this article is written with bias or its content is untrue, please state this in detail. I find it to be a very great offence to place this respectable artist, his life and achievements generally under "suspicion" and nobody deserves this. In that doing you are hurting unnecessarily the reputation and honour of a living person.

On the other hand, if you follow up your detective investigation on my collaboration (with Goliath613), in particular, you will realise that i did almost not contribute with content to the article, but I mostly corrected problems of translation (from the German original) and/or some visual aspects and a couple of details on the information as I found out about it. Thanks.--Hammero (talk) 16:03, 14 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done I have removed the autobiography tag. However, I have placed a tag requesting better sourcing. There is a vast amount of detail in this biography that has no corroboration. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A vast amount ? it would help if you referred with detail to what it is lacking, because, that same tag could, I truly think so, be put to absolutely every article in the wiki (and in general) and I could show it to you if you name me any bio here. The general question must be if there is bias or untrue facts. I do not think a birth (and death) certificate is asked for, for every biography. And even then, how could you be sure it is not a fake? Lets give the artist, who is a public figure, some benefit instead of "condemning" him without proof that the facts are wrong. We rae still getting material from him directly, although he is very reluctant and is even thinking of asking the wiki for a deletion of this pages.... Today arrived the Program book of the ISCM 1987, from which we could cite important aspects. But if you truly read , with interest what here is written, you will realize the man has not been interested in the music scene for years and this is one of the reasons there is so little (published) material about him and his work. ManyThanks --Hammero (talk) 18:10, 15 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you understand that in publishing your logo here, you have released it to the public domain such that anyone can now use your logo on their music publications? I'm not sure that was your intention. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bernardo Kuczer (c), Basel 1995 , Peripéteia II b'.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add ((OTRS pending)) to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:30, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bernardo Kuczer (c), Basel 1995 , Peripéteia II e'.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add ((OTRS pending)) to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:30, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bernardo Kuczer, Basel 1995, Sound 1-4.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add ((OTRS pending)) to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bernardo Kuczer, Basel, "Volkshaus", 1995, Space Concept.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bernardo Kuczer, Peripéteia IIa, tape.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bernardo Kuczer (c), Basel 1995 , Peripéteia V.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:46, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bernardo Kuczer (c), Basel 1995 , Peripéteia VI.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bernardo Kuczer © Basel, Volkshaus Space-Sound view.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We contacted the owner (sent him a form for permissions), and he answered that he will be sending permissions for the visual files to wikipedia himself. (Is this the right address to do so ? permissions-en@wikimedia.org ). How will we know if he finally did ? I hope he does it on time. It is quite difficult to relate to him… Thanks again. --Hammero (talk) 18:34, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, that is the proper address. He'll need to identify himself sufficiently so that the permissions committee can verify his right to release these files to the public domain. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Civilización o Barbarie regarding the content of this article. Please engage in the discussion prior to making any more edits to the page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Toccata quarta (talk) 20:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Citations like these were hardly useful at Civilización o Barbarie. They are no more useful at Bernardo Kuczer. Citations that quote extensive passages of praise for a particular event, without specifically mentioning the subject (Kuczer in this case) appear as if they are trying to elevate the subject's status by association to the praiseworthy event, even though the quote makes no such connection. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:59, 15 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

now I really do not understand. You are constantly asking for citations and references (you did not answer my earlier request on that point). I think these (type) of quotations are very important, since they can give (specially to the "unprofessional reader") a different perspective perhaps of Kuczer achievements. If such important magazines as Perspective o NM (ask Jerome Kohl, I understand he was something like the director) explain in an article the nature, importance of the place and the excellence of that particular moment (1984) were Kuczer got his Prize, it should make an undeniable difference. It is not the same if he had gotten the prize at a festival in his primary school. Perhaps you do not know that this is a biannual event lasting full 2 weeks with hundreds of composers, concerts and hundreds of pieces from all around the world and utmost importance in the NM scene (I am a professional musician). And to to stand out in such a context is not only very difficult i guess, but also a true achievement. And the citations (which does not need to be complete), addresses, not Darmstadt in General or over the years, but in particular the event of 1984. It is truly of no good to cite just the name of the magazines, as you did, since there must be dozens of articles about the courses along its history and in hundreds of other magazines and encyclopedias. I put the quote complete, you can cut it shorter. But the quote itself with no text is really of no use. --Hammero (talk) 19:35, 15 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since you mention my name, I should clarify a point: I was Managing Editor of Perspectives of New Music from 1984 to 2000. This means that I was in charge of production, and office management—not "the director", which would more accurately describe the position of Editor, held by John Rahn from the time of my arrival until ten years later, when Ben Boretz reassumed the post for one year, and then was replaced by a group of five editors (Joe Dubiel, Marianne Kielian-Gilbert, Marion Guck, Andrew Mead, and Stephen Peles). That said, while the cited article may verify the importance of the Darmstädter Ferienkurse in the mid-1980s, this is not relevant to the issue of whether Kuczer's composition was actually performed at Darmstadt in 1984. Neither Kuczer nor his composition are mentioned in that very comprehensive review. This in fact suggests that the piece may not have been performed at Darmstadt that year. Do you not see this?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:22, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for completing the information about "Perspectives". As I said before, Goliath613 did not put these critics here on the first version, until the notability question was asked, were we then put what the composer sent us, that he still had. And wikiDAn61 left only the mention of the names of the magazines without text, when he was the first to edit the article after the notability question was done with. If that is the line of the Wikipedia (I am not a musicologist), that the context is of no use, I agree they should then not be there at all (I think It is pointless to bring the fact that Darmstadt was mentioned in the magazines).

Regarding the fact that neither the composer nor CoB are mentioned in that article of Perspectives (he is probably also not cited as having gotten the price, which is an indisputable fact (see link to the "Chronology of the Kranichsteiner Musik Price" on the BK page), but the concert and CoB are mentioned in other articles depicting the Summer courses of 1984, see: Halbreichs, Hespos, Oehschlägels (also in Musiktexte Ausgabe 6-10 http://books.google.de/books?hl=de&id=HPn0AAAAMAAJ&dq=heimo+stranz&q=bernardo+Kuczer#search_anchor ) (We don't have the Musiktexte, neither the complete Perspectives articles only the "snippets" sent to the composer by the IMD) and others, I think, shows (without wanting to provoke in any way whatsoever), that a) the reporter did probably not do a thorough enough article or complete research, b) he was not at the concert which happened at 1a.m. All this information is at the IMD. The composer wrote to us saying that the late hour was a really big problem and a pity, the reason why many people, who usually went to the "normal" concerts, did not come, neither heard about it. I hope you can agree with this... ----Hammero (talk) 14:48, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The fact that you do not actually have the full texts of some of the sources helps to explain some things (and illustrates the danger of citing sources at second hand). It does seem probable that, as you say, the reporter was not thorough enough. You may be interested to learn that Lisa Dominick's review in Perspectives implies that the late-night concerts were very popular and well-attended, contrary to the opinion of the composer: "The twice-daily Composers Forum sessions (discussed in detail below) were, with the exception of the evening concerts, the most heavily attended events. … At night, concerts of new music abounded. Each evening, the main performance commenced at eight o'clock; it was followed by various other performances, often continuing into the wee hours. Of course, these late-night events were usually topped off with visits to local restaurants and pubs, some of which could be bribed to stay open past the official closing time" (pp. 275–76).—Jerome Kohl (talk) 20:31, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well at least I guessed right about the restaurants ! I doubt very much that miss Dominick stayed until so late (1a.m. and on almost the last days) (i probably would not either...), and will try to "refute" her appreciation with the text we have from Monika Lichtenfeld (I understand you are fluid in German) and which I myself had to translate into English. (I will explain later were this comes from): "... Bleibt noch die Chronistenpflicht des Hinweises auf den Kranichsteiner Musikpreis, der alte Darmstädter Tradition entsprechend an Komponisten wie Interpreten für herausragende Leistungen in der Studiokonzerten verliehen wird. Zu den ausgezeichneten Komponisten gehörten... und Bernardo Mario Kuczer, ein neunundzwanzigjähriger Argentinier, der zur Zeit in Freiburg weiter studiert. Er weckte am frühen Morgen, in einem der üpig wuchernden Nachtkonzerten, ein Häuflein ermüdete Hörer zu hellwacher Aufmerksamkeit, mit Musik von bersten Wilde, fanalhafter Ausdrukskraft. Auschnitten aus einem vielteiligen Tonband Zyklus mit dem Tittel Zivilisation oder Barberei. Kuczer hat die archaisch kruden, komplex getürmten Klänge, ohne schönenedes Intermedium, direkt auf Tonkassetten fixiert und etwas vom undomestizierten Gestus dieses Machens, bleibt der Musik als experimentelles Wiederstandspotential eingeschrieben." This text comes at the very end of the mentioned Radio broadcast which ended after an hour or so, with the piece "Him'l" from CoB. The composer send Goliath613 a tape of the broadcast and the German text (which we think was an extract sent to him by the Hessischer Rundfunk). If you want I could send you this part of the Radiobroadcast, when she reads the text. I have now written to de IMD asking for the full transcript which apparently is there. If you think so, we should delete this until further evidence is presented. As I told you, we put this text in only so as to help to proof the notability question. The composer had not so much press as is known... I think it has to be considered that all of this happened 29years ago, long before the internet existed. The composer has read our discussions now. He is somehow hurt that even his participation in Darmstadt was disputed and wants to send me scanned copies of the letters of invitations from the IMD, even one which asks him questions about CoB so as to be able to include it in the Musiktexte as well as his invitation from Hommel to 1986 and other things. Actually, I found the announcement of the Studio concert in an IMD page some time ago. I saved it complete into my computer, but I can not find it anymore in the internet (why?). I could paste it complete into an email if you whish. I am trying to be as forthcoming as possible. Thanks for your effort and interest. --Hammero (talk) 23:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I cannot speak for other editors, but on my own part there is no "dispute" about whether Kuczer was at Darmstadt in 1984. The problem is that a source (Dominick 1985) has been cited in support of this fact. When that source fails even to mention Kuczer's name, the citation gives the appearance of falsification. It seems clear to me that this was not intentional, and was caused by carelessness on the part of that journalist who included Dominick as a reference (perhaps intending it as a general account of that year's courses, not meaning it as verification of Kuczer's involvement at all). I do not require a copy of the HR broadcast, but it would be good to have a proper citation for the IMD source mentioned in the article. For example, if this is published in a book, the author, title, place, publisher, and year; in online, the URL where it may be consulted. Ihre Annahme richtig ist: Ich kann ziemlich gut Deutsch verstehen, obwohl "fluid" (d.h. "fluent") eine Übertreibung sein könnte.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:12, 18 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talking of German and "Übertreibungen", and since you have been somehow near the "Civilización" thing, which has caught also my attention, let me also comment a little on following: I saw a small observation you did on the Hespos quotation. And I somehow want to "challenge" your perception of that, for different reasons: first, in regard of what you seemed to understand of Hespos (German) remark "krasse Fürchterlichkeit". I think you concluded that "he found that terrible but unforgettable". But, that is not, in my understanding, what he means (I did the translation myself). I do take "gross terribleness" possibly as a (big) compliment, a typical word-play coming from the guy who obviously likes to construct such eccentric words. I believe that, perhaps, he would have used it as well to describe the "superb ugliness" of the face of a Picasso woman ? On the other hand, I think it was Roland Barthes (?) who somewhere said (and there you are, I can not quote the source !) "beware of adjectives ! It is not the same to say I love you , than to say I love you a lot ! (which transforms (and diminishes) enormously and in obvious manner the first expression). I think you understand what I mean... Another fact that would contradict that understanding (and I truly think Hespos, who seems to have an "ego" of his own... was rather "showing off" big towards his interviewer !) is that Kuczer wrote to me some time ago, that it was a well known fact then (in 1984), that Hespos (invited as special guest to Darmstadt and part of the jury), who had been going in and out from the concert hall during the performance, embraced the composer in front of the audience after that concert and told him that till then, he thought nobody should get the price, but now that he heard his music, he would propose him for it. Which he apparently did. He even asked the IMD for time and a room (which was not easy to get apparently) for the composer to give a small seminar on the music, I think on the next day. And recommended him later to somebody who was to organise a concert in Hamburg for Kuczer. Of course one could ask Hespos directly, that would be interesting, If someone happen to come across him. Kuczer has told me by now many very interesting and strong stories of reactions of other well known composers and musicians which are not documented (properly) and will have to stay out of the wiki. Had he been Stockhausen we would even know what he ordered at the restaurant...--Hammero (talk) 01:16, 18 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• go to the top on the right side
• click "Preferences"
• scroll down
• activate "Enable email from other users" (if necessary, it might be activated by default.)

See you, --Goliath613 (talk) 14:28, 18 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hammero. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Mr Kohl: I would like to explain the following. The composer wrote to me yesterday saying that Halbreich seems to have misunderstood him, because, when he played pieces to him, he played them from a cassette, since they were not on the big Hall (and they communicated in English). (On the other hand, he does not deny having used, between others, also Cassette machines (big plural) with special techniques he himself invented to implement some parts of some pieces of this music). I contacted Goliath613, because he did the French translation (my French is no good at all) and because he is a certified translator from French and he told me that the word "réalisés" is a rather open one. I just looked in Google translate (French to English) and see that for that verb several possibilities are given, starting with "achieve" but including for exp. the word "perform". If you think the word produced is the right one, that will have to stay as a "claim" done by Halbreich, which the composer strongly challenges. This has nothing to do with the aesthetic question of the citation, but with technical aspects of the doing. If he for example had said Kuczer did it with "a shoe", would the composer have to admit that ? Here I think (and it is getting really dif) one could put next to the word "réalisés" either "citation needed" or perhaps a footnote saying that the composer thinks that word is a missrepresentation or whatever... In any case, we did put the French version of the article, so that there is no question of bias on our side. Thanks --Hammero (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One thing about Wikipedia that may take time to get used to is that verifiable sources matter, and what we "know to be true" does not. In this case, however wrong Halbreich may be, we are not entitled to change his mistake, simply because we believe him to be in error. I, too, have some credentials as a translator from French (though not a formal certification), and while it is perfectly true that "réalisés" may be translated in a number of different ways, "reproduced" is not one of them. It is also very plain that (as unlikely as it seems) Halbreich believed that Kuczer produced—realised, achieved, made, carried out, fulfilled, completed, or whatever—the work entirely with cassette tape recorders. It would be good to find a different published source that corrects this claim, but until such a reference can be found, all we can do is accept Halbreich's text as it stands.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:01, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So many words about one word! Mamma mia... Fortunately, in my real (translator's) life, I hardly have to endure this kind of discussions. Thank you for your patience. --Goliath613 (talk) 04:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hammero. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bernardo Kuczer, signature and logo (c) B.M.Kuczer 2013.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hammero. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]