User talk:Brianboulton/Archive12

Book
Hi Brian, Have you used the new book tool yet? I think it would be perfect for your Antarctic articles. Graham. Graham Colm Talk 16:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Top left, under Toolbox, it should have "create a book". You can add articles by clicking on "Add wiki page" and eventually download them as a PDF or order a book. Just follow the links. Graham. Graham Colm Talk 16:26, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations again. Again!
With Agrippina, that's now four featured articles on the main page in four months and two in eight days! That's got to be worth this one.


 * Congratulations on getting an opera project article to FA and on the main page! -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulatins Brian, you deserved it.  Nancy Heise    talk  20:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Lists of operas by composer
Hi. I'm hoping we can work more closely on these lists - at least so we don't duplicate our efforts (as could easily have happened with Wagner). We have a work in progress page here.

I've been originating the lists, usually on the basis of existing typed material, often translated from other wikis, turning them into tables with a word processor, and checking them against Grove. Michael Bednarek has been doing the wiki tech work making the lists sortable, moving columns around etc. GuillaumeTell has been doing some painstaking final fact checking. At the moment he's working on List of operas by Handel.

You are very welcome to join the group and join in our discussions about the way these articles are organized. We think some standardization is good for the reader, though flexibility is build into the series and the presentation of information does vary to some extent. -- Klein zach  03:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Scott and PR
Congrats on Agrippina! I extended the semi-protection on Scott for a week, and will comment on the latest edit later today. I fixed the wonky Unification of Germany peer review too. If you have the time and inclination, would you mind looking at the PR for Cherry Springs State Park? It seems nearly ready for FAC and has gotten some good feedback, but I would rather find problems in PR than FAC. If you are busy, I can ask some other editors, just let me know. Take care, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Moni3 is going to review it, so (unless you've already started it or really want to) you're off the hook, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:51, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for agreeing to look at it. I need to start a couple of small articles to get rid of red links and see if I can find another free image, so it is not a great hurry. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations
on Agrippina making featured article of the day. Jonyungk (talk) 13:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Four award
You may be eligible for this new award.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I haven't forgotten...
Brian, I now know how to make .ogg files and extract short bits from longer bits. Yeah! The first step on the path to becoming a master of audio files. I am now investigating copyright and audio files. If anything, it is far more complicated than images! Argh. Awadewit (talk) 06:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

One per day
Sorry I didn't read that carefully enough. It's a new day now but how do I remove the second one. Cheers, sorry about this  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 23:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! Yep hopefully I've now learned. :)  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 23:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Adelaide Rams
Sure. I'll take a look later this evening and add my comments to the peer review. Finetooth (talk) 00:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Pinafore
Here's the Peer Review Page: Wikipedia:Peer review/H.M.S. Pinafore/archive1 Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Choral symphony
Just dropping a ping to see if you were still planning on taking a Wiki break or if you could please look over the choral symphony article. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 22:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Still pinging. :-) Jonyungk (talk) 07:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the answer to the ping and for your suggestions. I've put the article on peer review. Jonyungk (talk) 13:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And extra thanks for all the work you are putting into the peer review for this article&mdash;hopefully, it is worth the effort. Jonyungk (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * (Also left comments on the peer review page as I wasn't sure where to respond.)
 * I have been reading your peer review in sections as you were posting it. My response is that it confirms the article has a lot of problems and needs a thorough rewrite, if not a rethink, to address them. The reason there isn't a lot of coverage of contemporary choral symphonies is because there is little about these pieces to be found other than liner notes for the odd recording. That is why only Glass and Henze were mentioned. Even then, I'm not happy with the little amount of editorial space they received&mdash;they feel very much "tacked on" rather than an integral part of the article. And yes, the section headings were my summaries of the content for those sections. Perhaps once the dust settles, I'll eventually revamp the article, taking those of your suggestions into account that I haven't already incorporated. Thanks once more for looking it over, and an apology for making you work so hard. Jonyungk (talk) 22:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you hit the nail on the head when you mentioned the lack of contemporary works mentioned in this article. Maybe, as I do further research, the information will help towards clarifying the direction this article should take. Right now, to me it feels like it is a mess, structurally speaking, and any suggestions toward clarifying it in this regard would be appreciated. Jonyungk (talk) 19:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

PR Backlog
Unfortunatley I am not able to help much this weekend with the backlog either - I am pretty busy and am having some internet access issues to boot. WIll try and get one done here quickly, thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hamence
Scutlled it. Otherwise there is only sextet and septuplet but none others over four  YellowMonkey  ( cricket calendar poll! ) 01:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review
Cheers for that Peer Review, I know my prose isn't the best so detailed PRs always come in handy. I've completed the points you brought up, so if you'd like to continue, please do. :) Sunderland06  (talk) 20:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Markham PR
I really didn't find much to say, it is a very clean article and a bit of a relief after spending three days wading through that inauguration article. At worst, you're a bit too gentle on Markham, but I also have trouble being harsh on people I spend so much time researching.

If you get a chance, do you think you could take a look at Checkers speech? It has barely moved in the GAN queue, so if you feel motivated to take care of that, that would be great, but at least please give me some comments on it. I think well of the article, but writing about a seven day period and a speech in the middle of it is very different from my normal bio sort of article and I'd be grateful for feedback. I'm considering Matthew Boulton as a new project but with a new book on him out in July, it is best to wait a bit on that.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I had seen it in the queue and looked very briefly at the article - I will do a PR but it will probably be two or three days before I can get to it. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent article. I have added a PR with a few minor suggestions. Finetooth (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I just supported it at FAC. Looks like we will be "queue mates" at FAC (Cherry Springs is now there too). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I am so used to the bot listing peer reviews I forgot to list the FAC. Appreciate the reminder, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on another well-deserved FA! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I had not seen it - I always forget to watch the FAC log - thanks for all of your help and for letting me know, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Fountain of Time FAC2
Thanks for the copyedit. I have reposted the article at WP:FAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:19, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Keep up your own good work and of course, any future editorial assistance is always appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your infinite patience, curiosity, and enthusiasm. Your copyedit instrumental in the progress of this article. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:35, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Gilbert Foliot
I finally got the last bits I needed to finish him off, and think I have it fully researched. Can you take a quick gander at it (especially the "Writings" section, which is what has expanded the most) and let me know what you think? I'm going to drop a note on Malleus' page to have him do his most excellent work of smoothing my rough prose, but Gilbert's about ready to hit the big time... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Catholic Church
Brian, I posted a response to you on my talk page but just in case you did not see it here it is again: Brian, just this morning I was thinking about this issue and wondering if there might be someone other than me who might consider being the nominator for RCC FAC. I am not very good at navigating FAC comments but perhaps someone like you could nominate the article, navigate the responses and I could be your assistant helping you? Would you consider this? I think you said you were not a Catholic, even better! That would show the article to be just an effort to make an informative article on the subject, which is what it is!  Nancy Heise    talk  15:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Brian, co-nom is OK with me. I am not in any hurry over RCC, we could even do it next Fall if you like. I am offline during July and usually am not ready to hit Wikipedia until school begins in the Fall anyway. Right now, RCC is working out its mediation over the name issue which appears to be winding down but it may take a few more months since the agreement is that we change the article name to Catholic Church and discuss it some more on the talk page with anyone who comes by. The article content is very stable. It has not changed since the last FAC and even then it changed very little. There are no disturbances about any part of the article except the first sentence which is being disputed for really minor reasons. I am very familiar with everything that has happened in the article and I posess or have access to all of the sources. I am not good at responding to FAC comments so if you want to co-nom, I would suggest that you be the person who can respond to the comment and I can provide you with the facts and sources. If you have other ideas, I am open to your suggestions. I would like to ask the FAC director if he intends to count opposes that are unsourced and unfounded before we submit for FAC though as I do not see the point in going forward unless the FAC process takes note of the difference between a serious good faith oppose with reliable sources to support it and one that is not.  Nancy Heise    talk  21:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Brian.  Nancy Heise    talk  22:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What music articles and what archbishop? Let me know if you need an extra copyedit before you submit them for FAC. I would like to repay your kindness and help for my articles.  Nancy Heise    talk  22:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Doug Ring in 1948
Per your Pr, I have sent it to FAC  YellowMonkey  ( cricket calendar poll! ) 05:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Lang...
I gotta ask, why did you decide to work on an archbishop?? Did he eat ponies in the arctic too??? Ealdgyth - Talk 23:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Dammit, Ealdgyth, I just snorted water all over my desk! If he did, I can't wait to read about it. Surely there was a polar explorer who wrote operas, too. Maralia (talk) 23:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * (snickers) Ealdgyth - Talk 23:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, he ate dogs. And wrote operas under an assumed name. He was also once described as the most pompous man in Britain, and I have a weakness for pompous Victorians (see Clements Markham, soon to be FAC) as well as a general interest in recent church history (my father was a preacher-man). And there's a slight Glasgow connection, too...So I'm giving him a go, but no serious work before July. Brianboulton (talk) 23:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Jifna review
Greetings Brian! I have addressed the majority of your concerns and have questions for those remaining. In addition, I made some changes unrelated to your review in the Demographics, Culture, Economy, and Islamic/Crusader/Ottoman sections/subsections, and would really appreciate you review those changes. Thanks for all your help! --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Possible copy edit?
Hi Brian. I'm not sure if you are available to copy edit and article, but I've been wanting to put posting system up at FAC for awhile now, but I want to get one last editor to give it a once-over before I list it. If you would be able to look over while keeping an eye out for bad grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, etc., I would really appreciate it! Thanks. -- T orsodo g Talk 18:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have addressed all of the issues brought up in the article's peer review and talk page, so I'm hoping its in pretty good shape when you get to look at it. And there's no rush, so tackle it whenever you have time. Thanks! -- T orsodo g Talk 19:29, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! It looks and reads a lot smoother now. I think I will put this up at FAC later today if you have no more suggestions for the article. -- T orsodo g Talk 17:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations
I'm a little slow this time, but I just noticed the star for Markham. Most pleasing. Please accept my congratulations. Finetooth (talk) 01:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Checkers speech
The Fisch is done with this dog of an article, feel free to take your own shot at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Brad Pitt
Hey Brian, I think I gotten the review quotes, I think. I'm wondering if you can check some of them out. It'll be the ones that surely don't make sense. Also, I was wondering if you had a suggestion towards the reviews of Seven, Snatch, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, those are the ones I found difficult to "merge". Also, I wanted to work on Pitt's stance against Proposition 8 in the media section, but can't come up with anything. -- ThinkBlue   (Hit   BLUE)  23:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't see the one from the Boston Herald, but its something related to the articles of Variety and The Huffington Post. -- ThinkBlue   (Hit   BLUE)  14:28, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Geoffrey Boycott/archive1
Work has been done on your points, would it be possible for you to revisit the FAC and see what you think? Cheers SGGH ping! 09:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Now at peer review, thanks! :) SGGH ping! 16:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Smetana
Why would you want to use File:FriedrichSmetana.jpg or File:BedrichSmetana.png, when you can get the full photo from Britannica, courtesy of the Royal College of Music. The photo is verifiably public domain in the US, published on p. 94 of this 1904 book (same situation as above), p. 144 of this 1896 book, and p. 330 of this 1910 book, which also has several old photos of Prague. Unfortunately, a lack of information precludes it to be on Common (which would require the 70 years pma of the author to pass the country of origin rule).

Other photos/drawings/portraits for you to consider:
 * Smetana's photo here appeared as the frontispiece of this 1900 Czech book (indisputable PD-US, but PD-Czech still possible issues)
 * This is Max Švabinský's portrait of the man, which was published on p. 24 of this 1917 book, p. 543 of this 1918 book, and p. 180 of this 1918 book
 * This photo was published on p. 180 of this 1919 book
 * There is also this line drawing of him (1919)
 * Here is another photo...
 * This oil painting (crop the frame out of this) can be at Commons, PD-Art due to PD-Old (70 years pma) and PD-1923 (published in this 1893 book, although I think it is kind of moot with the PD-Old)

You can find his The Battered Bride score in this book, and this issue of National Geographic can provide some pre-1923 photos of Prague. Jappalang (talk) 02:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that I have a decent photo of the Smetana museum in Prague, which I could scan and upload to Commons if needed Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 10:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I found two free images on Flickr. I have a photo similar to File:Smetana Embankment, Prague detail.jpg but it is a paper photo from the 1990s and might not scan as well. I like the exposure on this one and like how you can see some of the many towers of Prague in it too. I also found File:Smetana Museum.jpg on Flickr, which is just of the museum, but a bit dark. I also have a paper print of the Charles Bridge tower in the foreground and the former waterworks tower behind (which is the one I was thinking of) but am not sure if the waterworks tower is part of the museum. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad you like the images - if they are OK I wont scan mine. I added one to the Smetana Museum article, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Peer review clerical maintenace
I will be glad to update the PR backlog starting Tuesday until you let me know you're ready to do it again. Have a wonderful trip, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 10:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up and have a good time in Italy, thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome back and thanks for taking over the clerical duties again. If I can count right there were 26 additions to the backlog in your absence, so it is not too bad considering. Did you see that Rhinemaidens is scheduled to be WP:TFA on June 5? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Bedřich Smetana

 * No problems, Brian. Thank you for making it possible to send in a DYK for Smetana.  I would be happy to participate in the peer review (when the article gets more stuff to go over).  Enjoy your trip!  Jappalang (talk) 10:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

H.M.S. Pinafore
I'm still struggling to satisfy peer review comments on H.M.S. Pinafore and hope to bring it to FAC in the next few weeks. Shoemaker is too ill lately to help. If you are able to help satisfy any of Awadewit's comments, your help would be much appreciated! All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. 1. Actually it would be helpful to have your thoughts on the Colin Prestige article issue, as I agree with Shepherd that this article clearly qualifies as a WP:RS.  2. As for the three image queries at the top of her comments, do you think I've answered them well enough?  Shoemaker may be able to hunt down more info, but I think there is enough there to prove that they're public domain, and I do not have access to materials that would give us more information about them.  Unfortunately, Shoemaker seems to be unable to help with Pinafore, between health issues and a big family visit.  Thoughts?  3. Finally, I've worked pretty hard on the "cultural impact" section.  Some reviewers have said that it's an important section and should be moved up higher.  Others have said that it's trivia and should be cut down.  Well, I've sure cut out a lot from it already, and now everything in it, I think, is a substantial reference in a major popular or cultural medium that demonstrates the impact that Pinafore has had on modern culture.  I also tried to work on the writing in the section so that all of the examples are put into context somewhat.  Any further thoughts?  All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Bartered Bride
I've responded to your request on my talk page. Raul654 (talk) 03:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)