Template talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

Removing quotes around foreign nicknames

Could someone point out which guideline or policy demands the removal of quotes around "Nannerl" and "Bäsle", as in this recent edit by Reywas92 (talk · contribs). I would have thought that nicknames in a foreign language are two arguments for using quotes. Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Georg Nissen

Georg Nikolaus von Nissen wasn't Mozart's relative --მოცარტი (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Correct, he wasn't — at least not directly. Do you think he should be omitted altogether from this template or should he be place under "Biography"? I think he should stay where he is. Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

you're right--მოცარტი (talk) 16:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Add "Mozart and smallpox"

I propose to add the article Mozart and smallpox to the template, after Mozart family grand tour:

Any objections? Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:56, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Background color

An editor changed the background colour from "tan" to "wheat" because it "provides better contrast for the text". That may well be so (although I'm not convinced about the overall aesthetics), but many other composers' template also use this colour, and I think such a change should be discussed first, probably at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers. Following WP:BRD, I'll revert that change. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:05, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

And here I thought Wikipedia:Don't edit war over the colour of templates was just a silly nightmare scenario that would never ever happen in real life! Just when I think my opinion of Wikipedia couldn't be lower, something like this happens. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. James470 (talk) 01:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Where do you see an edit war? This is simply Wikipedia's bold, revert, discuss cycle at work. As for the essay you quote, it also says: "Standardization is generally a good thing." And while it advises against a revert, it fails to apply a similar caution against the initial change. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Maybe no one could see World War II brewing back in 1934. Or maybe I'm wrong here and there won't be an edit war over this silly thing. Regardless, I see far more effort being put into details like this than on trying to use more than one source for articles or at least giving proper credit to the one source we fall back on for a whole crapload of articles. James470 (talk) 19:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)