User talk:Robertgreer/Archive 2009

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Robertgreer, for the period January through December, 2009, by month in which the last item in a thread was posted (no particular order is maintained within each month, and this operation is performed manually and imperfectly at best.). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives Genesis • Exodus • Leviticus • Numbers • Deuteronomy • Joshua • Judges • Ruth • Samuel • Kings @ This user can be reached by email.

\*create a new section

What's going to be happening in London theatre and ballet from Boxing Day through Twelfth Night? — Robert Greer 23:41, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, over Christmas I'm going to try and start creating some kind of uniformity in the way that articles about major ballet schools are written. I've tweaked the lead paragraph of the articles about the School of American Ballet and Royal Ballet School, but before I go any further, I was wondering if you have any specific suggestions. As I go through, I will start creating seperate articles for schools that are connected to specific ballet companies, so I would like your input in making sure that I'm including the most useful information.

Also, I was wondering if it would seem like a point of view issue to write an article about the 'big six' ballet schools, which we here in Europe call the 6 'most famous' in the world. (Royal Ballet, Vaganova Academy, NYCB School (SAB), Bolshoi Academy, La Scala, Paris Opera).

Oh and sorry I didn't get back to you when you asked what ballet was going on in London over Christmas. I was too busy to reply at the time and then never got round to it since. Needless to say it's the same old trash, Nutcrackers coming out of every orifice. Having said that, English National Ballet (my personal favourite) are doing a really fantastic version of it which I saw and was completely blown away by back in 2002. The designs are by a famous British cartoonist, Gerald Scarfe, who has Drosselmyer looking a bit like a dominatrix, sets the dance of the snowflakes inside a freezer, has dancing peacocks that look like Vegas showgirls and in the final act, has the corps de ballet dressed as Basset's Liquorice Allsorts, an iconic British brand of sweets/candy/confectionary or whatever your choice of word. It's very much a classical ballet, but the designs match the choreography which is often really quirky, definitely something that would be enjoyed by someone who likes their Balanchine. I would imagine it would certainly be to his taste if he were still alive. ENB are also rotating their season with two MacMillan productions, Sleeping Beauty and the company premiere of Manon. The Royal Ballet are doing Peter Wright's yawn-worthy traditional version of 'Nut' for the 24th year running. I just wish they would come up with something new for christmas as they've been doing Nutcracker every Christmas for over 50 years now.

By the way, I found the transcipt of an interview between Ninette de Valois and Maini Gielgud, it makes quite interesting reading (especially when you consider Madam was 102 at the time). — http://www.danceinsider.com/f1011.html — Crazy-dancing (talk) 04:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I got back from visiting Mom in Ohio just before New Year's.

Your note came in the week I gave finals and I'm just getting back to my talk page.

I fly to London tomorrow morning and stay a week before travelling on to Stocholm. Thank you for the tips!

ENB's Nutcracker has closed but I'll see their Manon and the Royal's Bayadère. And a show or three!

I'll try to get onto Wikipedia from London. — Robert Greer 16:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. I've created a new infobox to go on articles about active, working ballet dancers. You can view it here. I've made it in the same colours as the Ballet portal page to try and create a uniformity of style, but I wanted your opinion on it before I write the documentation page and start adding it into articles. I think I've included all the most important details, without making it too big and cumbersome. I was considering putting in notable guest appearances, but think these would be better placed within the body of the individual articles. Your input would be much appreciated. Thank You! Message from: User:Crazy-dancing 10:13, February 9, 2009

That is brilliant! And you're right about leaving guest appearances to the article body. I added {{Wikiproject Dance|Ballet=yes|class=template}} to the talk page. — Robert Greer 18:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I've added 'prestigious' back in with an additional reference including the word itself (it also confirms he gained a qualification from them. Hopefully this additional reference is enough to support its inclusion. — Mgm | ^(talk) 11:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! — Robert Greer ( talk )

I notice that this category is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to (are members of) it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted, without discussion, in accordance with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1 . I'm notifying you, the creator of the category, in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding [[Category:900 disestablishments]] to articles/categories that belong in it.

I have also blanked the category page. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of blanking and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to revert the blanking if you wish. However, doing so will not prevent deletion if the category remains empty.

If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with {{db-author}}.

— Stepheng3 ( talk ) 20:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. — Robert Greer ( talk ) 20:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. — Stepheng3 ( talk ) 21:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I've moved this page to the talkpage Talk:List of New York City Ballet 2009 Winter repertory/Archive 1 main . Due to the fact that we have articles with names like CP/M , we can't actually have "subpages" for articles. If you want a subpage or archive of an article (why? no idea.) you'd actually want to put it in the talk-space instead. If you have any questions, let me know. Kylu ( talk ) 06:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip! The "main page" archive was created inadvertently in the process of creating a talk page archive that exists to keep track of completed to do items as well as changes in casting (this is the meat of the ballet world.)

Can Talk:List of New York City Ballet 2009 Winter repertory/Archive 1 main be deleted? (I would have put a {{db-author}} tag on it but am technically not its author.)

A pecularity of ballet is the existence of — and need for — multiple casts. Dancers are often replaced the day of performance and a slip of paper inserted into the program and occasionally so near curtain time that, there being no time to print such pieces of paper and slip them into Playbill , that an announcement is made over the house speaker just before the lights go down.

If the understudy at the opera or in a Broadway play goes on half the audience want their money back. True balletomanes will buy their tickets on the basis of who's dancing (or if they're extreme will see two or three or more casts perform the same ballet the same week.) — Robert Greer 13:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

'Kay, page is gone. If there's anything else I can do for you, let me know. :) Kylu ( talk ) 02:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you again! — Robert Greer 20:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I notice that you have recategorized this and a couple of other article sin the crypto corner. I've been unable to find any discussion of the rationale for doing so, so I invite you to enlighten the puzzled. Thanks. — ww ( talk ) 21:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

See Talk:Public-key cryptography#Category:Cryptography vs. Category:Public-key cryptography etc. — Robert Greer 18:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I had noticed that, but as it gives no background, went looking for more. Since it was your category revision, I checked your contributions, figuring there would have been some discussion. I couldn't find any, so I left the mote above.

Your reference is quite spare … — ww ( talk )

[PS] I also seem to have run afoul of some blocking (see next message which appeared during WP announcing an edit conflict).

It's fine for an article to be in more than one category, but none of those categories should be descendants of each other. — Robert Greer 23:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah … Now I understand the reasoning. It's a classificatory tidying sort of thing.

I'm not sure I agree, as there is, as far as I'm aware, any requirement that the category meta-structure meet any particular architectural or structural or logical standard aside from usefulness. In the case of crypto there are, in one analytic cut, only a few high level classes with helpful conceptual distinctions. One is between codes and cyphers, and another is within cyphers, symmetric cyphers (ie, secret key) and asymmetric cyphers 9ie, public key/private key) cyphers. Public key cryptography is really a misnomer as an article title, as the various techniques often thought to be part of it all depend on asymmetric cyphers used in various ways (ie, in various protocols). There are several other useful analytic classification cuts, of course, but one category structure can't reflect all in a clean way.

You may be able to see my doubt about the reclassification from this brief account. I'll think more on it. — ww ( talk )

This I.P. is that of the Borough of Manhattan Community College and could be blocked from anonymous editing (it probably should be!) We are an educational institution, not an I.S.P. Should any of our students desire to edit Wikipedia from computers on our campus network there is no reason that it need to be anonymous (if they have need to edit anonymously it has nothing to do with their academics and they are free to do so from wherever else they so choose.) — Robert Greer 20:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

{{unblock-auto|1=128.228.128.2|2= Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by " Mr. Georgewilliamherbert (message) ". The reason given for Mr. Georgewilliamherbert (message)'s block is: "Abusing [[WP:Sock puppe|3=J.delanoy|4=1346290}}

For redirects, there are special categories that can be used to categorize them. These are listed at Category:Redirects . These are generally applied through templates .

In other categories, redirects should be categorized sparingly. One shouldn't add the article and 10 redirects in to the same article category. (see also Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects ).

Thus, in categories like Category:New York City Ballet 2009 Winter tour repertory , the 14 redirects to List of New York City Ballet 2009 Winter tour repertory should be removed. — User:Docu (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Citing sources#When to cite sources . — Robert Greer 22:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, my apologies. While searching how to format this sort article, I read this wp:directory . Does this article qualify under #5? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dethlock99 ( talk • contribs ) 19:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)<! — Template:Unsigned — > <! — Autosigned by SineBot — >

As per wp:directory criteria 5. Should this be merged with In Vento ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dethlock99 ( talk • contribs ) 19:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)<! — Template:Unsigned — > <! — Autosigned by SineBot — >

As the (sole) author of both the In Vento casts and In Vento articles it makes no difference to me whether these remain seperate articles or are merged into one. I did it this way based on the opinion — strongly presented — of another Wiki. editor that they should be seperate (I am accomodating to a fault.) In some ways it's easier to maintain seperate atricles as ballets get revived and (after their first three years of exclusive ownership by the company that commissioned them) get performed by other ballet companies. This ballet by Bigonzetti will probably not result in a long list, whereas his recent Oltremare likely will ( City Ballet still hold the rights.) — Robert Greer 21:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I just added categories by decade and century , following the pattern for Operas, and hope you like the results! - Fayenatic (talk) 16:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

You are too modest, make that categories for Ballet premieres by date , year , decade and century ! This is a much needed addition. Thank you! — Robert Greer 01:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

move categories (and pages) within Category:William Shakespeare plays to Category:Works by William Shakespeare

The following was posted to Category talk:Works by William Shakespeare and Category talk:William Shakespeare plays , as well as the talk pages for the two articles in the former and to Category talk:Adaptations of works by William Shakespeare , Shakespearean comedies , Shakespearean histories , Shakespeare Apocrypha , Shakespearean tragedies and Category talk:Poetry by William Shakespeare :

Could the categories within Category:William Shakespeare plays be moved to its parent, Category:Works by William Shakespeare ?

Which otherwise contains only one category, Poetry by William Shakespeare .

This would flatten the taxonomy without creating confusion or losing significant information. — Robert Greer … 23:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I will wait until March 25^th to hear any objections before proceeding with this. — Robert Greer 15:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

See discussion here . The best place for such discussions is at WP:CFD . That page has step-by-step instructions on how to propose merging categories. - Fayenatic (talk) 18:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

These are valid objections and I will proceed no further. — Robert Greer 02:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

All ten provinces and three territories of Canada were filed the same way, and as of right now the other eleven besides AB and SK still are. For what it's worth, while I personally agree with removing it, they need to all be treated the same way, either all double-filed or all removed from Category:Provinces and territories of Canada — but there's a bit of a constant tug of war between those who want to respect duplicate categorization rules and those who feel that the importance of the topic necessitates avoiding the second click that becomes necessary if they aren't double-filed, so it tends to go back and forth with no real resolution. But either way, we do need to be consistent in how we file all thirteen of them. Bearcat ( talk ) 21:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I did not have time to do so but will make them consistent today. — Robert Greer 11:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Your removals of categories are contrary to Wikipedia:Categorization#Eponymous categories ; note the sentence that's written in bold face. Also see John Kenney's comment at Category talk:Provinces and territories of Canada . He is quite right, categorizing the articles on provinces and territories is exactly what the category is intended for. — JAO 12:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to undo my edits; this is not a matter of great enough interest to me to be drawn into a difference of opinion beyond accomodating Bearcat's reasonable request for consistency.Mvh — Robert Greer 13:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

All right, I undid them. Mvh (you remember my native language!), — JAO 14:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Bor Ni i Sverige eller utomlands? — Robert Greer 15:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I Sverige, har bott här hela livet. — JAO • T • C 16:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, just wondering, what's the reason you removed Category:Polyhedra from Platonic solid ? If anything, the Platonic solids are the most well-known polyhedra.— Tetracube 16:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, never mind that. Just saw your comment on the talk page.— Tetracube ( talk ) 16:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, been a while since I sent you a comment, just wondering if you're following the Eurovision Song Contest there in the US. Sweden has a fantastic pop/opera entry. I don't know the singer, but she's apparently a top opera star in Sweden, she certainly has a stunning voice. Crazy-dancing (talk) 01:27, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

No, but I have a friend who does, an American who's lived in London the past fifteen years and is moving to Sweden this fall (he speaks the language.) — Robert Greer (talk) 20:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Robert, I wrote a first pass of Ballo della Regina. — CaritasUbi (talk) 09:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you ever so much: so many ballets, so little time! — Robert Greer 20:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, am looking at sending my parental units on a blow-out trip to New York and then a cruise next year. I know that theatre tickets in NY tend to be higher than here in London, so I was hoping you could advise me. On my provisional itinerary, I've allocated $400 for tickets, but would this be enough taking booking fees etc into account? I haven't decided whether to send them to see the ballet or a musical, but perhaps you could tell me if there's much difference in price. Here of course the ballet is priced some £30-40 more than musicals for decent seats. Crazy-dancing (talk) 21:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

If you're going to order tickets from London, Broadway will be expensive, but would you consider letting the parents go to the TKTS booth? Unless there is a miraculous recovery in the economy half-price tickets will be available daily for almost every show at TKTS.

NYCB Fourth Ring Society is another matter: Fourth Ring tickets at $15 apiece!. You can join from London, on-line or on the phone, and order tickets the first day singles go on sale; season subscribers are given a few weeks to renew their subscriptions before singles are released, singles including pairs (or larger groups) to single performances.

This is the way I've bought NYCB tickets for years, just show up at 10 a.m., when the box office opens, the first day they sell singles — one can order earlier on-line or by fax, but I don't, being picky about seating — with a wad of cash and buy the first and last performance of each ballet being danced that season with minor adjustments to avoid Saturday matinees.

Row C of the Fourth Ring is a great view for Balanchine or Robbins! City Ballet dances January through March and April through June (November and December are Nutcracker season) so what time of year will your elders be visiting our fair city? — Robert Greer (talk) 22:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I did notice on the website about the 4th Ring Soc, so I can take it on your recommendation that it is worth joining. As for the TKTS booth, we have one here in the West End too. I sent my parents to our TKTS when they were going down to see Billy Elliot and they left it so late in the day they had sold out, and I just don't trust them to get there in time. I think for a musical, advance booking will be essential. The cruise I've chosen for them sails from Barbados on the 5th November and I was thinking the New York trip could come either before or after that, just to extend the holiday out a bit. Basically I was thinking fly them to NY, day to shop and sightsee, night at the 4 seasons or somewhere swanky, another day to enjoy the sights, then pre-theatre dinner at Sardi's, then a show. NExt day fly out to Barbados to join the ship, or alternatively cruise first, then fly on to NY. 17:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I've made some changes to The Fountain of Bakhchisarai (ballet) if you are interested. Thank you! — Shir-El too 23:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

That is a major addition, thank you so much! — Robert Greer 11:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you could help: it looks like I may be researching, revising and editing ballet articles for a while and I would appreciate a maven/mentor to cross-check or monitor the revisions for inaccuracies or inadvertent misconceptions. Also, is it 'holye' to put links to YouTube clips of the material in question in the articles? Thank you — Shir-El too 14:49, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

PS polished The Fountain of Bakhchisarai a little more, though hopefully there will be more concrete information to add - eventually. What a shame the Iron Curtain hid so much excellence! — Shir-El too 14:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd be happy to ride shotgun with you! (I moved your You Tube link to its own == Extermal links == section, that's all.) — Robert Greer 15:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Much appreciated and many thanks!!! Will leave a note here when there's something new to report. Cheers! — Shir-El too 15:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if the Rodenbach Grand Cru is commercially available in the US, but you could probably import a case of 24 from Belgium for somewhere in the neighbourhood of 100 bucks. Well worth it in my opinion, and I'm just a starving student! Cheers, Oreo Priest ^talk 05:18, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Have you ever had the good fortune to sample Redbach? It's a blend from the brewery of two-thirds vinegary Rodenbach and one-third cherry juice, put up in little bottles. Cherry soda for grown-ups that even we starving academics could afford if only it were still available (the last bottles in New York were to be found a year ago at the Westside Brewery, a notable purveyor of Belgian ales which closed on New Year's Eve and has since re-opened as the Amsterdam Ale House.) — Robert Greer 17:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

What sort of cherry juice? Like pure cherry juice or commercial sugary cherry juice? And if you enjoy that, it sounds like you should try to get your hands on a peach beer and a Bush (the Belgian kind of course). Mix 'em together, and you get a glorious pèche-mel-Bush. - Oreo Priest ^talk 18:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Real cherry juice (would Rodenbach use anything else?!) — Robert Greer ( talk ) 17:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Deleted, per your request. Kbthompson ( talk ) 12:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Robertgreer! An article you have been concerned with has now been significantly overhauled to bring it in line with Wiki policy, guidelines, and prose style. However, without first-hand subject knowledge, the copyeditor may have left some items or citations for further clarification. If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Leamington Spa , address the different points if you can, and leave any comments there. Thanks.-- Kudpung ( talk ) 11:51, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Em dashes are unspaced per WP:DASH. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I noticed the recent discussion on your talk page concerning prima ballerinas, prima ballerina assolutas and Alicia Markova among others, discussions with my good friend Crazy-dancing who wrote, "I can't find any reliable web based sources that give information about her [Markova]." And there is the rub! The Internet documents (reliably and otherwise) current events but generally does not go back in time; and it was 1933 in which George VI purportedly created her prima ballerina assoluta. Unfortunately, he did not ascend to the throne until December 11, 1936, so the only way to resolve the matter would be to delve into the Royal Household's records from those years, taking perhaps newspaper reports as a starting point, but very few papers have their 1933 archives online. — Robert Greer 21:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

This was one of the posts on Ballerina Talk which preceded the Markova discussion:

Proposed solution to the pba problem

"The solution I propose for deciding the status of ballerinas in WP biogs is to choose a standard reference work as the adjudicator in difficult cases. The work I propose is;

Mary Clarke and David Vaughan (eds) 1977. The encyclopedia of dance & ballet. Pitmans, London.

The contributors to this volume were of high calibre, and the work contains mini-biogs of all the reasonable candidates for pb or pba. It only remains to decide whether any state or major company used an equivalent, but different title. On examining cases, I would suggest the following:

The USSR award of Hero of Socialist Labour (its highest award to a civilian), and its highest exclusively artistic national title was People's Artist of the USSR. Both these titles should be regarded as equivalent to pba when awarded to a ballerina. Ulanova held both these titles, so we can accept her as pba [nb, added later: the Soviet Union did not award pba as such].

The French title of Étoile is equivalent to Prima ballerina when applied to a female dancer; likewise any other title that is higher than Principal Dancer.

The grounds for or against pba should be noted on all candidate biogs; any who claimed pba which cannot be verified should be placed in pb category. What this achieves is to give us a framework for making decisions; there will still be difficult cases, but we will no longer be dependent on web-site myths." Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I still think this is wholly in line with WP guidelines, and is the best practical solution. I should add that Mary Clarke is probably the most eminent living historian of the dance, and if she & Clement Crisp did not claim that Markova was awarded pba, then that speaks volumes – imho. This is, of course, not a discussion about worthiness; it is about data verification.

Oh, I should comment that George VI was not on the throne in 1933, nor was he the first in line of succession. In any event, any such action by a reigning monarch is always extensively reported, and would have been picked up by biographers. The full text of The Times is one-line: give it a go! One-day pass costs £4.95. Archive from 1785 to 1985 Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:52, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

As I commented on the Ballerina talk page, further investigation shows that unfortunately, there is no iron clad definition of what makes a prima ballerina or prima ballerina assoluta. As with Markova, there is no evidence of her being 'awarded' the title, but the consensus of opinion is that she was recognised as one, and when a reputable international ballet company (ENB) titles her PBA, then I think that is reasonably definitive. After all, in the majority of cases, it is the ballet company that decides who receives such a title. As with Margot Fonteyn, it was the Royal Ballet's choice that she should be made Prima Ballerina Assoluta, not the Queen's, the Queen simply carried out a duty in having a formal announcement of her appointment as PBA. So if English National Ballet recognise Markova as Prima Ballerina Assoluta, then who are we to argue with that? The same can be appplied to others. Alessandra Ferri is recognised as Prima Ballerina Assoluta of La Scala, but does that have any less value because she didn't have a formal ceremony to receive the title?

I saw from here that it's been exactly two years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work. — rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:22, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! — Robert Greer 17:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Robert. I see you made a formatting change at The Ne'er-do-Weel . In all the plays and musicals I work on, I divide the first paragraph in the Lead, about the play's creative team, from a second paragraph where I begin by describing the original production. I don't want to revert your change without asking, but I really would like to divide the paragraphs consistently with all the other Gilbert plays, and not combine them the way you did, OK? -- Ssilvers ( talk ) 19:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to format as you think best! — Robert Greer ( talk ) 19:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello. On 15 September you created the redirect Gurney StoveGurney Stove → Goldsworthy Gurney#Other work which looks fine, but you also created Talk:Gurney StoveTalk:Gurney Stove → Talk:Goldsworthy Gurney#Other work . Was the latter accidental? Likewise with Pilot enginePilot engine → Double-heading#Special terminology employed and it's strange counterpart Talk:Pilot engineTalk:Pilot engine → Talk:Double-heading#Special terminology employed . It was the bogus talk page section redirect that caught my eye, but I see that you have regularly created talk page redirects when you create non-section redirects as well. Are you doing this by hand or with an automatic tool? I hadn't thought that practice either common or recommended. -- ToE 07:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Nothing heard, so I have blanked Talk:Gurney StoveTalk:Gurney Stove and Talk:Pilot engineTalk:Pilot engine. As mentioned above, my primary concern was the broken section redirect, but I've asked around and been advised that preemptive talk page redirection is generally not recommended (except as an attempt to avoid specific and likely confusion). Redirection pages have lives independent from their targets and their talk pages are useful for documenting RfD results. A random sampling of redirects also shows that talk page redirection is an uncommon practice. I would still be very interested to hear if these reqirects were created by an automated tool. -- ToE ^T 05:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Do as you like; neither Gurney Stove s nor Pilot engine s are of great interest to me. I am totally consumed finishing City Center's 2009 Fall for Dance , ABT's 2009 Fall season , and City Ballet's 2009 Spring season , Saratoga Springs Summer season and Fall tour to Japan before they start their 2010 Winter season . It will be a good month after that's done before I come up for air; that will be April 1^st . — Robert Greer 15:20, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

A new user Moscowballetofficial ( contribs ) has done a complete rewrite of Moscow Ballet (United States) which may be well meaning but has gutted the article of references. I wonder if you could have a look, as you have carried out a couple of edits on this article in the past? Thanks. Scillystuff 19:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I've given it a slight going over but haven't time to do more at present, between City Center's Fall for Dance and City Ballet going to Japan — how I wish I could go! — Robert Greer 13:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I've put in an infobox and started to put back the references that were removed, but it will be a slow job as I'm confirming each before replacement. Talking of Japan, I'd love to see K-ballet , but the closest I've been is seeing Miyako Yoshida as a guest at The Royal Ballet . Scillystuff ( talk ) 13:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

What I'd really like to see there is the Noh theatre. They show up here at Japan House from time to time, but to see them in their home! — Robert Greer 14:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Important! - Round up what few ballet enthusiasts you know on Wikipedia and get them to vote on the proposed merging of the Ondine articles that would see the article about Frederick Ashton's production of the actual ballet, being merged into one about the music. See here: - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music#Straw_Poll — Crazy-dancing 20:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Done! — Robert Greer 21:21, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks! It's a shame that with most of the ballet articles, the dancing seems to be treated as secondary to the music in many cases, but here the music was commissioned specially for the Ashton production, so I don't see any justification in attributing the whole ballet to the composer, rather than the choreographer who actually put the production together. And it doesn't help when the music lobby are making snotty and flippant remarks to the effect that music is the superior art form, it just gets on my nerves, especially when I'm a musician too, I don't value one any more than the other, it's just idiots who do. — Crazy-dancing 22:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

BTW, I have now put forward my own proposal on that page if you want to take a look and add your vote to my poll. I think if I pursue this to the Nth degree, we can get a favourable decision. It's probably the only way, as the Classical Music buffs seem to have hijacked the whole discussion for themselves and there is hardly a 'ballet' voice on there. — Crazy-dancing 23:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Good on you; in the words of one of President Truman's supporters, " Give 'em Hell, Harry! " — Robert Greer 02:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Suggest you check if this discussion is being mooted anywhere other than the music page, as this may not be the final word on the subject. Please let me know if it pops up again, and where. Hope my contributions were relevant. Cheers! — Shir-El too 16:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Your contributions were much appreciated and indeed invaluable! This is not the first time the classical music fanatics have attempted a sneak attack, so I will maintain an active guard over Ondine (Ashton) in all its guises beyond merely keeping them on my watchlist. — Robert Greer 17:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you should all read WP:CANVAS : " Messages that are written to influence the outcome rather than to improve the quality of a discussion compromise the consensus building process and may be considered disruptive. . . . . " — Klein zach 00:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I do not know what this comment is doing on my talk page as I did no more than write, "Very strongly oppose." Unless it is not permitted to disagree with you. Beyond this I forwarded to Wikipedia users involved in the previous discussion on Talk:Ondine (Ashton) — the decision which you have repeatedly attempted to sneak around (first by engaging me in a private discussion on my talk page, second by means of the rump session you convened on WikiProject Classical music) — the message Crazy-Dancing posted at the beginning of this section. I quote the message in full here to make clear its author's neutrality:

Important! - Round up what few ballet enthusiasts you know on Wikipedia and get them to vote on the proposed merging of the Ondine articles that would see the article about Frederick Ashton's production of the actual ballet, being merged into one about the music. See here: - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music#Straw_Poll

Unless, that is, you object to "ballet enthusiasts" voting in a straw poll about a ballet, which may well be the case. I am, Sir, your most humble and obedient servant — Robert Greer 21:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

(1) I deliberately used only one indent (:) as space is getting very narrow indeed. (2) My comment is under your's on Kleinzach's talk page. (3) I personally think comments like "This is not the first time the classical music fanatics have attempted a sneak attack … " etc. are less than helpful. Everyone here is entitled to an opinion, so why borrow trouble? Why not figure out a way to enlist each other's expertese instead? Entrenchment went out with the Maginot Line. Sincerely — Shir-El too 21:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Blessed are the peacemakers … — Robert Greer 22:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you … but 'peace' has little to do with it. "If you're not part of the solution - you're part of the problem!" And unfortunately where I come from 'peacemakers' are all too often the latter. Cheers! Shir-El too 18:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It is ME that got in touch with the 'ballet enthusiasts' to try and involve them in the discussion, so I find it ridiculous and completely petty for you to be coming here acting as the Wikipedia thought police Kleinzach. I was the one doing the canvassing, I didn't know the rules about canvassing and so I got slapped on the wrist for it, now YOU need to GET OVER IT and quit with the 'checking up' on people, otherwise I will be contacting the administrators about you and your stalking of other users. — Crazy-dancing ( talk ) 21:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! — Robert Greer 22:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I am creating this notice to invite all interested parties to vote on the proposal to merge Undine (ballet) and Ondine (Ashton) to a new article at Ondine (ballet) . You can read the discussion and add your vote to the poll at:

• Discussion
• Poll

Look forward to seeing you there to help resolve this situation, thanks! Crazy-dancing ( talk ) 11:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

05-Oct-2009: Hello, Robertgreer. Wikid77 here. If you are interested, the pronunciations of Russian and other performers can be added as remote-footnotes indicated by " [p] ". I went to Russia once, so I'm guessing Marina Semyonova should be pronounced:

[p] - The name "Semyonova" is pronounced as "Sem-YOH-no-vah".

If that is not correct, please re-edit " Marina Semyonova ". I've read that, typically, Russian names emphasize the 2nd syllable: Romanov would not be "Roman-off" but rather "Ro-MAHN-off" in Russia. Also, Natalie Wood was Natalya ("Nah-TAHL-yah"). The use of superscript " ^[p] " (coded by: ^[p]) is my invention to indicate pronunciations, but so far, no one has objected to the style. As you might have discovered, most practices in Wikipedia were invented "out of thin air" since 2001, unless enough people objected. That is the reason so many practices have been non-standard, compared to the rest of the world; however, many people are working to shift Wikipedia to more normal methods. For example, thousands of medical articles have been upgraded to "medical-textbook" levels, linking to related illnesses or diseases. If you wish to add pronunciations using another format, that is fine with me. I have been using remote-footnote " [p] " to allow multiple pronunciations to be discussed under the "Notes" section of each article. Reality is just not so simple as claiming everyone speaks "THE ONE" pronunciation for each name. Americans say "SKedule" while British say "SHEDule". Anyway, using remote footnotes requires expanding the Notes section to include the typical "{{Refbegin}}" with "<references/>{{Refend}}" to use the smaller font. Again, only add pronunciations if you have the time. - Wikid77 ( talk ) 04:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know that {{col-6}} now accomplishes what the old {{col-6-of-6}} used to. The earlier {{col-6}} generated columns of varying width, like the simple {{col-break}} does, but that is a problem on the pages I edit, which call for uniform spacing from section to section. The new {{col-3}} — most of what I do calls for three column — is much easier to use than having to invoke seperate {{col-1-of-3}}, {{col-2-of-3}} and {{col-3-of-3}} templates. Thank you again! — Robert Greer 03:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock #1658360 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Syrthiss (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC) Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

cross-posted from User talk:Syrthiss

Thank you (that was fast!) — Robert Greer 15:58, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Not a prob. Just good timing on mine and the unblock requests bot's part. :) Syrthiss (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

cross-posted from User talk:Fetchcomms

Thank you for catching so promptly my typo. on the A. Corella‎ redirect! — Robert Greer 21:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, just doing NPP.-- fetchcomms☛ 22:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Further to my earlier efforts, I have now also created Category:Northern Ballet Theatre. As this has always been a relatively small company, with only a small pool of 'notable' dancers, I doubt if it will ever need to be split into sub categories, I think one category for all the dancer will be sufficient, once I've found some articles about ex-NBT dancers that is. Crazy-dancing (talk) 22:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I have been pondering further over the categorisation of dance companies in the UK. Firstly, much as it's nice to have a separate category for ballet, I am wondering if the 'Ballet companies in the United Kingdom' category should be made redundant and marked for deletion, with those companies in that category being added to 'Dance companies in the United Kingdom'. It's just that I don't see a great need for a separate category for the four or five ballet companies that fit that description, I think it would be more sensible to recategorise them all simply as dance companies. I know in countries (such as the US) that do have lots of ballet companies, it's worth separating them off into sub categories, but not for a small country like the UK that only has a handful. What do you think? Crazy-dancing (talk) 15:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I would not be so modest! You have plenty of ballet companies for Category:Ballet companies in the United Kingdom within Category:Dance companies in the United Kingdom. If you really want to merge them I won't object. but my worry is that they get lost among the far more numerous, albeit smaller, modern dance companies. — Robert Greer 16:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right. I will have a think further, plus there's a bit of reshuffling I'd like to do with the categories given to some of the existing dance companies anyway. For example. the Rambert Dance Company should be under BOTH ballet and contemporary dance headings, as it began as a ballet company, but I guess I'm just starting to over think this now hehehe Crazy-dancing (talk) 16:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

A company like the Rambert definitely belongs in both categories. This is one of the strengths of Wikipedia: the possibility of complex categorization. — Robert Greer (talk) 16:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Have you got a source for this edit? SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, get the DVD. — Robert Greer 21:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

If you'll pardon my saying so, that's not good enough. I personally don't wish to get the DVD. To be a responsible wikipedia editor, when you added the information you should have provided the source of the information. If it appears by some means within the DVD, please quote what it says, and identify the DVD in a ref. As it stands, I would still be justified in deleting your addition as unsourced. I don't want to do that, since I presume that what you've written is true, but the rest of that article is properly sourced and I'd like it all to be. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

If you'll pardon me, it is good enough. Any person who cares to prove (or disprove) the truth of the assertion is free to do so. I would also add that the DVD is a primary source, whereas anything found online is secondary (that is to say, some other person sat down, watched the DVD and wrote out what he'd seen.) — Robert Greer (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence and act accordingly. I am disappointed that you are being so unhelpful about this. Apart from the demands of wikipedia policy, it would be a matter of common courtesy to me for you to specify where and how the DVD gives this information. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 22:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

If you put the DVD into a player and watch it you will see the exterior of the Mercury Theatre indicated by a sign which also has a poster announcing the Rambert Ballet, following which Moira Shearer dances Giselle. — Robert Greer 22:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I've put that information into a ref. It doesn't match up to the rather high standards which are officially demanded of us, but it's adequately convincing, and, as you said above, easily checked. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 00:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

You recently created Category:Redirects from intials, but its title is misspelled (missing "i"). I'm sure you'll want to change it to Category:Redirects from initials and fix up any referencing templates, etc. Thanks. -R. S. Shaw (talk) 07:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! — Robert Greer 22:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know, I changed a couple of the redirects you made.

Vic-Wells was the original name of the Royal Ballet, not BRB as you put in your redirect, and vice versa, the Sadler's Wells Ballet was the predecessor of BRB. Without meaning to sound like I'm teaching you to suck eggs, I'll give you a brief history:

1931 - Vic-Wells Ballet & School formed at Sadler's Wells Theatre

1939 - Vic-Wells did very briefly become Sadler's Wells Ballet, but soon after, moved to the Royal Opera House to become the Royal Ballet

1946 - A second company was formed called the Sadler's Wells Ballet, which became Sadler's Wells Royal Ballet, then Birmingham Royal Ballet

In between all of that you have the various different periods where the companies switch around from being 'resident' to being 'touring' and dancers swapping around between the two companies etc, but generally people think of the Vic-Wells as being the Royal and the Sadler's Wells company as BRB. Crazy-dancing (talk) 00:54, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for straightening out the redirects! — Robert Greer 15:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, I'm always happy to help. BTW, I hope you don't mind that I've changed some of the categorisations you created relating to the Royal and BRB. I intend to become very active in creating articles and collating as much information about the two companies as possible, and I just would find it easier using 'my own' categories initially. For example, I am planning to start creating articles of as many ex Royal and BRB dancers as possible, and categorise them as Dancers of the Royal or Dancers of BRB, and then when I have 'gathered them all together', I will then start splitting them down again, into sub categories such as Soloists of, or Principals of etc. I did just want to mention that in case you thought I was trying to suggest that what you have done 'isn't good enough', which isn't the case, it's just me and my one tracked brain. Cheers Crazy-dancing (talk) 16:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

In addition, I have now created the Category English National Ballet, but as there are very few articles relevant to that category at present, I am not going to create sub categories just yet. Thanks Crazy-dancing (talk) 16:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, the BRB etc. lie within your bailiwick! — Robert Greer 17:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I found this article while working on a disambiguation page. I checked both articles' talk pages and it appears you got the template backwards in Giselle, but I fixed it based on your talk page comment. If there is a merger, it will potentially affect the work I've done, but hopefully someone else can fix it if there is a merger. — Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 23:01, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I got them bass ackwards! — Robert Greer 23:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Robert - I note you are very active in editing dance-related articles, and have made a couple of edits at Flore et Zéphire. This article was created by a banned user and has potential copyright violation issues. The former issue was about to lead to its speedy deletion. Nevertheless, I believe the subject is worthy of an entry. I will try and tackle copyvio (by deleting a lot of the text, i'm afraid), and i wondered if you would like to work ot imrpove it? Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 05:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for finding the copyright violations and letting me know about them. Unfortunately Flore et Zéphire is outside my bailiwick; I write mostly about current ballet companies, such as New York City Ballet and Morphoses/The Wheeldon Company. I will let other Wikipedia balletomanes who are better versed in the period know. Thank you again. — Robert Greer 15:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for setting that in train. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Robert, nice speaking to you again and thanks for all the help you have always provided with my articles. Feel free to have a go at my latest article on Esteban Berlanga, a soloist with ENB. I could *possibly* help a bit with the Flore et Zéphire article but since I'd have to do some research and check out my ballet books first I can't commit to doing it anytime soon. Maybe in a couple of weeks if that's ok. Thanks. T. — Tanyawade (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, any help would be appreciated! — Robert Greer 17:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

You left me a talkback message, but I don't see any recent remarks addressed to me. Could you please leave a note on my talk page with something more overt? Thanks. — Jmabel | Talk 19:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks like he erroneously left talkbacks for a few dozen editors in the space of about 20 minutes on Nov 12: [1]. — I'm guessing some sort of automation gone awry. TJRC (talk) 21:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I left talkbacks to Wiki. ballet editors but not erroneously; I replied to Jmabel's query with a blue link to the top of this section, which I will copy to your talk page as well as post here: See User talk:Robertgreer#Flore et Zéphire. I sincerely regret any confusion this may have caused. — Robert Greer 21:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't particularly write on ballet. I'm not generally all that knowledgable. There are a few ballets and a few dancers I know enough about to write on, and I occasionally pass information along from certain friends who are generally expert, but for the most part I don't feel it's an area I know enough about to be a good general contributor. - Jmabel | Talk 01:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back to me! — Robert Greer (talk) 13:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I am curious about the message which you left on my talk page and would appreciate it if you would let me know what it is about. Figaro (talk) 15:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Robertgreer#Flore et Zéphire. — Robert Greer 18:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll be in London the 27^th thru New Year's Day. What's worth seeing? — Robert Greer 10 December 2009 (UTC)

In the West End, everything's worth seeing of course!!! Only joking. Ballet wise, the Royal and ENB are both doing Nutcrackers. The Royal are doing the rather outdated but traditionalist friendly 1984 Peter Wright version, and ENB are doing the 2002 Christopher Hampson production, which I think is the best up-to-date reworking of Nut that I have ever seen. The designs are excellent (Gerald Scarfe), really fresh and modern, but without detracting from the dancing, which is still heavily classical. I strongly recommend ENB, some would say that they don't have the technical excellence of the Royal Ballet, but for me, they bring an entertainment value to ballet that a lot of other big companies are badly lacking. Also, it is the last time they will be doing this production as they are commissioning a new Nutcracker for next year. Hard sell over, as well as Nutcracker, the Royal also doing an Ashton double bill of Les Patineurs and Tales of Beatrix Potter, but I don't imagine that would be of interested as is very much aimed at the children and family audience.

If you don't mind the more family focussed seasonal entertainment, the Peacock Theatre is hosting The Snowman, which has been a sellout at the theatre every year for abotu 12 years now. I went to see it on my own twice and it made me feel like a kid again, just good honest, wholesome Christmas fun. If you want to see something a bit more 'intellectual', Sadler's Wells are playing host to a Christmas season of Matthew Bournes Swan Lake.

Musical theatre wise, Legally Blonde has just opened here with a fantastic actress, Sheridan Smith, in the lead role. Sheridan was up for Best Actress at the Oliviers last year, she's fantastic, if a little raw in the vocals department. I would also strongly recommend the Menier Chocolate Factory production of La Cage Aux Folles, which is on at the Playhouse Theatre, with an Oliver Award winning performance from Douglas Hodge, who is back in the lead for a limited 5 week run. For shameless razamatazz, there's Priscilla the Musical on at the Palace Theatre, which is non stop camp, over the top nonsense, with a string of award nominations.

I could go on endlessly, so maybe give me a few pointers about what would interest you. Crazy-dancing (talk) 19:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Heavens, I forgot, you should also try and get yourself along to a traditional British pantomime. I've recommended panto to a few of my American friends when they've been here and much as it takes them a while to get the idea, they absolutely love it. In fact, Henry Winkler came over to perform here in a panto last year and enjoyed it so much, he's back here again, although sadly, not in London. Crazy-dancing (talk) 19:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the hot tips! A few years ago, my first time in London in many years, I binged on pantos, saw three in two days, including the one at the Hackney Empire and another with Sir Ian McKellen as the Dame, but maybe it's time for a refill! — Robert Greer 20:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I almost forgot. Best way to have a look at what's on in London is to use the official london theatre guide. You can find it HERE. And I was going to add that another hot tip for the West End is Oliver! I know Oliver was never well received in New York, but it's back open in yet another massive revival here at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane. There is quite a superb cast, including Griff Rhys Jones, a fantastic comedy actor, as Fagin. And in the role of Nancy is Jodie Prenger who won an Andrew Lloyd Webber produced TV talent show to claim the role. She is a genuine talent, terrific vocalist, and absolutely PERFECT for the role. It's worth noting that this production of Oliver is believed to be the fastest selling show in the history of the West End.

Thanks again — as a child I saw the North American tour of Oliver when they got to Ohio and still remember the lyrics! What a lovely, sentimental idea, to see it again in London. — Robert Greer 12:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I have just been reminded that the sensational Ruthie Henshall is returning to the West End production of Chicago from Monday and over the Christmas period. She did open the London production as Roxie and not only is she brilliant in the role, she is quite literally one of THE BEST musical theatre performers working in the UK today, proven by a generous sprinkling of award wins and nominations and by her numerous invitations to work on Broadway. Btw, I promise not to keep coming up with these suggestions, this will be my last hehe. Crazy-dancing (talk) 16:43, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

My cup runneth over! — Robert Greer 16:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm visiting my mother in Ohio and editing Wikipedia is more interesting than anything else there is to do at ten o'clock on a Saturday night, but you're in London and surely there must be something better to do there at three in the morning! — Robert Greer 02:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I despise London, it's a vile, dirty, smelly blot on the landscape. I will in fact be spending my Christmas in the Peak District, where I shall be enjoying long wintery walks through some proper English countryside, sipping mulled wine and cooking traditional Christmas fayre. Until then, like most Londoners, I will be sitting in misery, complaining about the total breakdown of British society and about how at Christmas time, the city is so crammed with people, it's hardly worth venturing outdoors. Crazy-dancing (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

You curmudgeon, you! Though mulled wine and goose do have their charms. — Robert Greer 18:56, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Robertgreer: The Norwegian cellist Truls Mørk has been having health issues and has stopped performing. There is little information about this in English. His condition is mentioned in the English Wikipedia article referenced to a Norwegian newspaper article. If you have a moment, would you mind reviewing the Norwegian article to see if there is additional information of interest? I thank you in advance for your time. Hrdinský (talk) 06:50, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I am leaving for London (then Denmark and Sweden) the day after Christmas, so this is not the best time for me to do much more than look at the English and Norwegian Wikipedia articles. Everything that is in the Norwegian article's section on illness is in the corresponding section of the English article; the newspaper article dates from November 7^th and the Norwegian article was edited four days later; I doubt that there is anything new. — Robert Greer 18:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Hrdinský (talk) 01:54, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! — Robert Greer 01:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Just thought you might fancy a look at Darcey Bussell doing something other than ballet. She's now a judge on Strictly Come Dancing, or as you guys know it, Dancing With the Stars, and on yesterday's semi-final, she did a guest spot dancing a jive with one of the pro ballroom dancers. It's been uploaded to YouTube. Crazy-dancing (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)