User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 69

Articles
Hello dear colleague! I'm not very good in speaking English. I'm editor of Russian Wikipedia. In this section are very popular articles about various unusual things (especially in England). Let us say: ru:Ламберт, Дэниел, ru:Уэст-портские убийства, ru:Манчестерская мумия, ru:Таррар, ru:Домери, Шарль, ru:Убийство в Красном амбаре. In the future, we plan to translate articles ru:Бери, Уильям Генри ru:Убийства в Уайтчепеле. All these articles have received or will good or featured article.

And I saw your article about the Tichborne. This article is suitable for us. You write good articles. It is easier to translate articles you write yourself (we do not have books in English).Tell me, you will be writing more articles in this style? About some murderer or an interesting case, or a strange man? Maybe we could will integrate the efforts you have mentioned, we have translated. Unfortunately articles on this topic is getting smaller. Best regards. My mail: zmashevitz@yandex.com Зейнал (talk) 02:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Sir? Зейнал (talk) 20:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Greetings. Most of my articles are not about murderers or strange men. They are about musicians and musical works, writers and their books, a little social history. I am glad you enjoyed the Tichborne article, but I have no other plans in that area. Brianboulton (talk) 22:24, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Ein Heldenleben/A Hero's Life
I posted a suggestion on the article talk page back in April to the effect that as orchestras, Grove, record companies, concert promoters and all comers refer to the piece as "Ein Heldenleben" it would make sense if WP followed suit. Since then no-one has added any comment, pro or con, and I'd be interested, if you have a few minutes, to see what you think about the suggestion. Tim riley (talk) 13:52, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have added my thoughts to the talkpage discussion. Brianboulton (talk) 15:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Ta! I have invited to the party at least one excellent editor who I know will disagree. The more the merrier. Meanwhile, thank you, BB. Tim riley (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Sarnia FAC
I have left a note on the FAC page to the effect that I shall be working on the prose over the next week or so, and asking that the delegates don't close the nom meantime. There is no "two-week limit"; most noms are allowed to run for much longer than that. Brianboulton (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Brian. I wanted to ask you: How come there are no other contributors to the Sarnia FAC Nomination other than you and Mattximus? I haven't seen GrahamColm or anyone else utter a peep. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Tippett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Recorder (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive2‎
My source review request for Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive2‎ is over 15 days old. You are an experienced source reviewer. Could you look at this.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Benjamin Disraeli
Wehwalt and I have been scribing away and now have Disraeli up for peer review. Should you have time and disposition to look in it will be esteemed a favour. No rush, naturally. Tim riley (talk) 13:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Happy to oblige, a welcome break from the muling and puking over i*f*b*x*s. But it might be a couple of days before I get started. Brianboulton (talk) 14:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

The Eighth
Well deserved: a new star for Sibelius Eight! See the top of my talk for another Eight, - I loved to hear that concert, although my mood at the time leaned more toward Romeo and Juliet than to "cheerful and optimistic", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Gerda. Talking of Eighths, there is also this one, promoted three years ago and possibly in need of tidying. I am not minded to try Bruckner's; once it gets started I have the feeling it is never going to stop. Brianboulton (talk) 10:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=572230188 your edit] to L'Arianna may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * | caption          = Bacchus arrives on Naxos  as depicted by Titian: the climax of the opera

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=573559639 your edit] to Michael Tippett may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page]. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

L'Arianna
The only thing of use in the info-box, to my mind, is the drop-down list of Monteverdi's operas. All the other information is already given alongside in the opening paragraph except for the language, and I don't imagine anybody opening this page will suppose the work was sung in Welsh or Portuguese. In fact, if you're going to keep the box I'd prefer the display default as Show, with the option to close if the reader prefers. But I see Verdi's, Puccini's and Wagner's operas all default to Hide, so that probably isn't a runner.

I particularly dislike this box because of the necessity of shrinking that glorious Titian painting to the size of a postage stamp. Bacchus, you will have noticed, is a fast-medium right arm bowler, and at this small resolution you can't see whether his foot is behind the popping crease. I see that the boxes for the Verdi, Puccini and Wagner operas have the composer's portrait as a standard fixture. That might be preferable for Monteverdi, if you are going down that path. But I can't think why you'd want to.

Other minor comments. That's my lot. A fine article, yet again. If you're taking it to PR I'll sit that one out, having had my say here, but please let me know if you take it to FAC. – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Lead
 * The opening sentence is ambiguous: does it mean it's his second opera and the music is lost or it's the second of his lost operas?
 * "Written under severe pressure…" There seems to be a dangling modifier here – the composer wasn't written under pressure. In fact the "written" etc modifies the "it", but that's rather hidden, and a perfectly correct sentence looks as though it isn't.
 * Libretto
 * "According to Monteverdi's biographer, Paolo Fabbri…" You need to close the quotation, presumably at the end of the sentence.
 * Roles
 * Second sentence: this is the third mention of La Florinda. You put her in inverted commas the first time, but not the second. I'd stick to the unpunctuated version for the third. Probably best to leave the inverted commas in the cast list.
 * Cast list: Teseo here, but he gets a grave accent in your text later
 * Revival: Venice, 1639–40
 * "the duchess Caterina's…" but "the Duchess Eleonora's" earlier on (with capital D)
 * "Lamento d'Arianna"
 * "various emotional reactions … sorrow, anger, fear, self-pity, desolation and futility" Is futility an emotional reaction?
 * "until the final iteration of "O Teseo"" – his grave accent has dropped off again
 * "Among other composers" – semicolon before Francesco Costa but only a comma between him and Sigismondo d'India (who I think was played by Hugh Paddick in Round the Horne).
 * Sources
 * Something odd has happened with the authorlink for Fabbri
 * (watching) I tried a larger image size, feel free to experiment. I would drop the link to the other operas by the composer completely, - there is a footer navbox available. (I had missed that.) It's better to maintain only one, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * @Tim: there are no infoboxes for Wagner and Verdi operas, they were all reverted. Some talk pages have them, for example Siegfried, or "joy in the effort of awakening". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Tim: thank you for your comments. In view of the copious talkpage review comments (a lot of them by you) I am not proposing to have this peer-reviewed. I will deal the prose issues. On the question of the box: I have increased the size of the Titian image, not to the extent suggested by Gerda (350pg) but to a more modest 280pg. This is bigger than it was in the pre-infobox days. I have removed the "other operas" links from the box because, as Gerda points out, they are included in the navbox at the foot of the article.
 * My objective in experimenting is not to demonstrate that an infobox is either necessary, or that it enhances the article. It does provide a means for getting rid of Monteverdi's grumpy old face and replacing it with something more welcoming. Other than this, largely for the reasons you outline, I'm not convinced that the box is any real improvement. But if it doesn't actually do any harm, maybe this sort of minimalist infobox is way of making peace, or at least a truce, between the warring factions? I am prepared to compromise for the sake of harmony. Brianboulton (talk) 13:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have deleted the Fabbri quote that you mentioned above, as on reading it again I couldn't work out what he meant. The other fixes are all done. Brianboulton (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Gerda: I think the enlargement you applied was somewhat over the top, and I have modified it. I have done as you suggest and dumped the links that are duplicated in the navbox. Brianboulton (talk) 13:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have a tendency to overdo things ;) - After this experiment was announced on three popular talk pages I dared to mention it in the case also, - I welcome truce, after feeling thrown into a battle that I hardly understand. If it was lead or box, I would understand a fight, but to have both, for different types of readers, could be simple and peaceful. Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Just a thought: Why does it say "eight scenes" in the infobox, when it doesn't mention that in the LEAD section? Wouldn't it be more descriptive to say "Baroque Opera" (I'd also mention in the LEAD that it is Baroque period, together with the number of scenes)? Also, the infobox points out the language of the opera, but that seems rather obvious from the names of the composer and librettist, and the place of the premiere. Just sayin'. Personally, I still don't see what the infobox adds. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Another thougth: would you be bold enough to try it for the fishers? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm - the article looks very good to me. I miss having the picture of Monteverdi somewhere in the article. In the I*****x, I noticed that there is no link to Claudio Monteverdi which seems like it might be useful. I wonder if there is some way to note there that the music is lost. Also might be worth including that the Lament is the sole surviving and best known part of the work. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:07, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I see now that Monteverdi is linked in the I*f*b*x. I am not quite sure how to explain this, but the first time I looked at the article with the I-thingy in it, and I read that list below the Titian image, it somehow felt like something was missing (besides the stuff anyone reading the first two sentences of the lead would know, that the music is lost except for the Lamentation). Thinking about it, I believe that seeing the list below the image (Genre, Librettist, Language, Premiere) I thought "Well, who wrote the music?" Now I realize it says at the top "The Ariadne / by Claude Greenmountain" but if you don't know what that means exactly, and you only find out by reading the rest of the I-thingy, then I am not 100% sure a reader ignorant of opera would get that he composed it. So what if at the top it read something like "L'Ariadne / Opera composed by Claudia Monteverde" with links to Opera and CM? Just a thought. I am still on the fence about I-thingies, but since feedback is sought, here it is. (Only slightly tongue in cheek). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Related thoughts are contemplated here: we don't have to say that something is a symphony if it says "Symphony" on top, but for songs, oratorios and operas it would be nice. Only what to say then? The genre or how the composer may have called it? - For orchestras, we say what kind below the name. It's probably best to take this question to the template talk. Until resolved, I add "opera" here, without a link to avoid overlinking, and without "composed". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I looked, but better don't "force" opera in, - the template should handle it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for these further thoughts, they are truly appreciated. However, if the infobox can only work by being expanded to include all the information that is in the first paragraph of the lead, then  it has lost its purpose and is probably best removed altogether, to avoid the kinds of possible confusion that Ruhrfisch raises. The discussion here leads me to believe that, if the infobox is added on a permanent basis, there is a danger that over time it will expand, as editors try to make it more "informative", and thus it will become a focus for argument and dissention among classical music writers. I will leave the box in place for a few more days, but my present inclination is to replace it with the Bacchus image and a slightly expanded caption, and to do as Ruhrfisch suggests by putting old Monteverdi's pic into the text somewhere, then letting the first paragraph of the lead do its job and summarise the key facts there. Brianboulton (talk) 22:41, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I slept about it and found a way to show the genre above the image, as Ruhrfisch suggested. This is perhaps not permanent, - we may want to discuss if a separate field is needed to do this, or if the the genre should be shown there, - then the additions like number of acts or description by the composer need to go somewhere else or won't appear, you decide. The number of parameters is limited at present, and I see no reason to expand them or to be afraid that they will grow. I would like to watch the experiment a little longer. I believe that seeing "opera" and the composer's name at a glance justifies the infobox, in addition (!) to the lead which shows the composer only after translation of title and a catalogue number which bares no meaning to the uninitiated reader. The Lamento could be mentioned in a more detailed image caption. Please find a position for the composer's image, in any case ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Neatly done, Gerda. I'll return to this discussion at the end of the week. Brianboulton (talk) 13:05, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

NOTE: this discussion has been transferred to Talk:L'Arianna. Any further comments should be added there. Brianboulton (talk) 18:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Tippett, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Pritchard and Sean Kenny (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Sense and Sensibility FAC
Hi Brian, about a year ago you were kind enough to weigh in during my last FAC, Pride & Prejudice. I found your comments very helpful, and was wondering if you might take a little time to review a similar nomination, the 1995 film Sense and Sensibility. I'm concerned that the current review is stalling with only one, albeit excellent, reviewer. If you are interested, the review page can be found here. Thanks so much.  Ruby  2010/  2013  05:47, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ruby, thanks for reminding me about this FAC which I saw a couple of weeks back, meant to weigh in but shamefully forgot! I will certainly look at at it and add some comments. Unfortunately, for the next few days my online time will be very limited, so I can't promise much immediate progress. However, I will leave a message on the FAC page informing the delegates that a review is pending, and asking them not to close it meanwhile. Another thought: you could approach User: Wadewitz for a review. She is not as active on WP as she used to be, but she has great Austen credentials, and if she has time  will certainly do the review justice. Worth a try. Brianboulton (talk) 09:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Brian. I will be sure to contact Wadewitz later today.  Ruby  2010/  2013  16:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Grace Sherwood FA
Thank you from PSky and Wehwalt for your comment, review, and support of this recently successful FAC. Pumpkin Sky  talk  20:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Well done, and glad to be of service. Brianboulton (talk) 20:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Britney Spears sings The Heart's Assurance
Pity the critic mentioned by Fritz Spiegl whose review was undermined by a compositor who, where the critic's manuscript read "Franck Sonata", consistently typed "Frank Sinatra" Tim riley (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 05:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Dizzy
Many thanks Brian: all done from me and ahead of planned schedule. It's all yours and I can enjoy my holiday with a clear conscience! All the best – SchroCat (talk) 09:43, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Have a great holiday. I should be back to full online access in approx 24 hours. Brianboulton (talk) 10:26, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Reminder
Check emails 2.26.96.230 (talk) 10:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Tippett, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sean Kenny and Macular dystrophy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Bizet TFA
I nominated the composer for TFA (the list seemed so empty), please polish, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I will indeed work on the blurb. I see that it is being treated at TFA as a "vital article" – where is it listed as such? The only classical composers I can find listed at WP:VA are Hildegarde of Bingen, Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, Mozart, Tchaikowsky, Verdi and Wagner. No Schubert, no Mendelssohn, no Mahler, no Monteverdi, no Vivaldi, nobody at all from the entire 20th century, and definitely no Bizet! This list is clearly rubbish; maybe there is an update somewhere? Brianboulton (talk) 13:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I looked, didn't see it, moved on, - it was not "vital" to me. (Not being able to add an infobox to my "own" article is more vital, or rather the opposite.) The "vital" list seems arbitrary, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake, it was a vital article (on the expanded list of c.10,000 articles, which is what TFAR uses for points purposes) until a couple of weeks ago, when Bizet was removed without any discussion (as far as I can see)... BencherliteTalk 14:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree with the removal of Bizet, who apart from Carmen has no realistic claim to be in the front rank of opera composers and didn't write much else that is memorable. But the expanded list still looks short of talent; I have nominated Benjamin Britten. Brianboulton (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Les pêcheurs de perles
This is a note to let the main editors of Les pêcheurs de perles know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on September 30, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/September 30, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Les pêcheurs de perles (The Pearl Fishers) is an opera by the French composer Georges Bizet, with a libretto by Eugène Cormon and Michel Carré, first performed on 30 September 1863 at the Théâtre Lyrique in Paris. Set in ancient Ceylon, it tells how two men's vow of eternal friendship is threatened by their love for a woman, who is herself conflicted between secular love and her sacred oath as a priestess. The duet "Au fond du temple saint", generally known as "The Pearl Fishers Duet", is one of the best-known numbers in Western opera. Although well received by the public and by other composers, initial press reaction to the work was generally hostile. Though not revived in Bizet's lifetime, it became popular in Europe and America, and eventually became a staple part of the repertory of opera houses worldwide. The loss of Bizet's original score meant that, until the 1970s, productions were based on versions with significant departures from the original; recently, efforts have been made to reconstruct the score in accordance with Bizet's intentions. Modern critics have detected premonitions of the composer's genius which would culminate, 10 years later, in Carmen. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Little Tich at peer review
Hello Brian, hope all is good with yourself. This is just a quick note to let you know of Little Tich who is performing at this peer review. Incidentally, it was during Tich's construction that I passed, quite by accident, through one of your FAs as it was that from which he took his stage name. I am in no rush at all, with a position at FAC pencilled in for nearer November or Christmas time. If you are able, I would love for you to take part. Many thanks! --  Cassianto Talk   20:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have just seen this. I will get to it in a few days' time. Brianboulton (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:48, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Samuel Merrill Woodbridge
I addressed the comments you offered at Featured article candidates/Samuel Merrill Woodbridge/archive1. If you the time, please take a look. If you have further comments, please do let me know.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:44, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Tippett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Matthews (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: The Diary of a Nobody
This is a note to let the main editors of The Diary of a Nobody know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 9, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/October 9, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Diary of a Nobody is an English comic novel written by the brothers George and Weedon Grossmith. Originally serialised in Punch magazine, it first appeared in book form in 1892. It records daily events in the lives of a London clerk, Charles Pooter, his family and numerous friends and acquaintances; most of the its humour derives from Pooter's unconscious and unwarranted sense of his own importance, and the frequency with which this delusion is punctured by gaffes and minor social humiliations. The daily routines and modest ambitions described in the Diary were recognised by contemporary readers, and provided later generations with glimpses of the past that it became fashionable to imitate. Before their collaboration the brothers had pursued successful stage careers, George as the principal comedian in the Gilbert and Sullivan operas for 12 years; Weedon had earlier trained as an artist and illustrator. Although the Diary's initial reception was muted, it grew in popularity and helped to establish a 20th-century genre of humorous popular fiction based on lower or lower-middle class aspirations. It has been the subject of several stage and screen adaptations. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Shackleton Definitive Stamp Set
Hello Brian Boulton,

I was about to draw your attention to a quote about "The Boss", but found this little gem that I think might be of interest to you:

http://www.sgisland.gs/index.php/(h)South_Georgia_Newsletter,_Aug_2009 (2nd Topic)

Greetings

Falcon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.230.21.153 (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Unusual Image
http://www.campinginfo.org/gfx/scott.jpg Is this really me? I look quite different than on all the other images? May be my personality is slightly more multifarious and dimensional than some people think? What do people on Wikipedia think about me? Have they tried to single me out? Are there people who try to put my in a bad light? I am lying here in my tomb with my best friends and we are slowly and surely drifting into the Weddell Sea but I am receiving bad vibrations from somewhere? Do you have to do something with this?

Robert--37.230.21.153 (talk) 12:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Understanding Scott
Very first thing to realize:

The absolute main perpetrator and critic of him is an overly emulous and antisocial boy who never really grew up but became entangled in a rude mixture of malevolence, jealousy and contumeliousness and projected his own frustration on the Captain.

His "double-biography" is nothing but a sheer wall of hatred and scorn. It has alomst nothing to do with the reality. It is the outcome of life-long frustration searching for a vent. Nothing more.

Believing the dirty deeds of a mental firestarter like this is dangerous,

Waving the flag for it even more.

Trying to establish his obviously false and perfidiously snaky distortions of facts is utterly wrong and a case of history falsification.--37.230.21.153 (talk) 12:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Unnecessary to mention that someone who praises one for getting to a certain point quicker than the other is concealing the fact that the other started 60 miles further away is usually either called a dazzler or a liar...--37.230.21.153 (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Shooting of Trayvon Martin
I've lately been monitoring this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin and had the feeling that the article and edits are owned by (a) Zimmerman-fanatic(s). Coincidentally, some days later the news arouse that Zimmerman once again proved himself to be violence-prone and got affirmed by the recent news of him: George Zimmerman briefly held after threatening wife Shellie with a gun / http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/george-zimmerman-held-wife-gun As I reckoned, the forces owning the article have dismissed and reverted to add this information to the article and I think it is high time for us 2 or even 3 (including the fishy fish ,-) to take a stand for justice and break the domination inside this article that is denying the truth and any aspects unfavourable of this murder called "Zimmerman" !!!--37.230.21.153 (talk) 13:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Someone already tried to implement the info about Zimmerman's recent violent outing, but as I said, dark forces are trying to conceal the fact: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin&diff=572240306&oldid=572238790

and when I read the explanation for the revert, I could puke: (This doesn't seem to belong here, and the report inaccurately says a gun was involved, though police had said a gun wasn't involved). :-( --37.230.21.153 (talk) 13:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

- so Police wasn't at the crime scene but does know how things went.... TIME TO STOP THESE ARTICLE HI-JACKERS!--37.230.21.153 (talk) 13:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Nansen passport
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nansen-Pass

You probably know (or do not) that Nansen had this ingenious and very social idea. I think this should be further detailed in other articles, maybe you might want to add this somewhere? (I'm hesitant due to some minor to major confrontations with the Wikipedia abbyses..)--37.230.21.153 (talk) 14:00, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

The Soundtrack of Reaching the Pole
http://www.universal-music.de/u2/videos/detail/video:195916/magnificent

FALCON — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.230.21.153 (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

B*x
I will look at the article. Do you want mt to semi-protect your user page and talk page to avoid 's post as an IP? I have blocked the IP for now. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I don't want to risk genuine correspondents from reaching me – can you simply protect from IPs (who rarely contact me)? I have no intention of replying to any of the above. Brianboulton (talk) 14:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I can change the protection here so that IP's and newly registered users cannot edit your talk page. I do not think IPs can be separately blocked. You are also free to simply remove things from your talk page if you want to. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:50, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, let's protect me for a while against IPs and newbies. I will delete the above rubbish when I next archive. Brianboulton (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:54, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Sarnia (FAC archive)
Well, GrahamColm has archived the nomination because of no consensus. I guess that's better than "no" because the article sucked. Now What? Re-nominate in a week or something? There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 22:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * FAC rules will require you to wait for at least 14 days before renominating. I'd strongly recommend that you take your time over this. The main contributor to the review was Mattximus (not a user I remember encountering before), who left his oppose in place. The first thing you should do is to get in touch with this user, find out on which grounds he/she is maintaining the oppose, and try and work with him/her to get these issues resolved. If there is no response, and you are convinced that you have done all that you reasonably can to meet these objections, you'll be able to report this at your next nomination. It might also be worth your while trying to find another editor, perhaps someone with experience of writing "city" articles, who is prepared to give you further advice. Good luck with whatever you decide to do. Brianboulton (talk) 22:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Pacifist
I nominated the oratorio for 9 November, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Noted - I've added a comment. Brianboulton (talk) 23:33, 30 September 2013 (UTC)