User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 41

Archive 35←Archive 39Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43→Archive 45

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bryan Gunn/archive1

Hi Brian Thanks for your input. The article's received 2 independent copyedits since your comments, as well as us addressing the specific issues you raised. Thank you for helping to improve the article. Would you mind returning to the FAC? Thanks --Dweller (talk) 10:42, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Helferich Clarke FAR

Hi Brian - A few moons ago, you reviewed Rebecca Helferich Clarke at FAR (review at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Rebecca Helferich Clarke/archive1). Nikki has done some good work on the article, and I am hoping that you might be able to return to your review with any updates or further work that you believe is needed. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 17:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Talkback

Re Wikipedia:Peer review/Campus of University of the Philippines Los Baños/archive1. Moray An Par (talk) 09:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I will look as soon as I can - I'm a bit overwhelmed at present. Brianboulton (talk) 10:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to follow this up (in case you forgot :) ) since it's been more than a week. Thanks! Moray An Par (talk) 14:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Looking at it now, sorry for the delay Brianboulton (talk) 16:37, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Thank you very much. I've replied to your concerns. Moray An Par (talk) 03:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Backlog etc

Well with the backlog I do not feel too bad letting the PR sit a few days. I have not looked closely at the FAC, but the quick glance I took showed some of the issues I mentioned in the PR (excessive amount of fair use media files, over-reliance on quotations) were also factors in the FAC. Perhaps I can gently point out that these issues take time and a lot of attention to detail. Perhaps if there could be focus on one aspect at a time (fix all the refs, now fix all the image files, not work on the lead, now the first section) that would be more feasible and less daunting?

I am off to review Bad Girls Club (a truly horrible television show) and will work on the oldest articles. One thing when the backlog gets this big is that there are usually several articles that are not really ready for PR and that I can review pretty quickly (much of it partially copy and paste). I will try to do 2 a day for the next several days to whittle away at things. Once more into the breech, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I see the most reecent Holy Wood ... PR has been closed by the nominator. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps a wise move, but this has happened twice before, to be followed by further PR and FAC noms which have predictably crashed and burned. Hard to know what to do here, really; a long and patient mentoring is called for, if someone has the time. Brianboulton (talk) 13:38, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I do not have time to mentor him (her?), but perhaps I can make a suggestion or two on the user's talk page. Will try to do two or three more PRs today. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Grainger

Belated congratulations on another super article! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:48, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Are you interested in Kathleen Ferrier? She's my latest project, though progress is snail-like at the moment. A sad story indeed. Brianboulton (talk) 22:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

English National Opera

I've been giving the English National Opera article a thorough overhaul, and have put it up for peer review. If you have time and inclination to take part in the peer review it will be esteemed a favour. Absolutely understand if not, of course. Tim riley (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Just seen it and will certainly look. I have a few outstanding chores, but should be clearer in a day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 15:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I have put the article forward for FAC here, if you are interested in looking in. Tim riley (talk) 09:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes indeed. I will look at it shortly. Brianboulton (talk) 10:35, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Scott / Terra Nova question

I just reverted an edit to the Scott article diff changing the end year of the Terra Nova Expedition. I looked at the Terra Nova article and it lists 1913 as the end date, but does not really mention anything that happened in that year. Could you please double check? Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

1913 is the correct year for the end of the expedition. The Terra Nova arrived at Cape Evans on 18 January 1913 to pick up the surviving members of the party. It took about a week to close everything down; the ship left on 26 January; biological, meterological and magnetic work continued until the ship reached Lyttelton on 12 February. Brianboulton (talk) 16:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks - not sure how I missed that before. Did you see the large map added to Terra Nova? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
The large map in the polar journey section was in the version promoted to FA in February 2008 (my second featured article, incidentally). The map in the lead section is a much-improved version of what was there before; this was added in August 2009. Brianboulton (talk) 18:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation - I swear I had read the article and did not recall seeing it before. Sorry for the bother, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ferrier

Is it worth pointing out somewhere in the article that her surname rhymes with "terrier" rather than "Perrier"? A Radio 3 announcer who ought to have known better Frenchified her the other day. Tim riley (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I must say this aspect hadn't occurred to me. Radio 3 is not what it was....I'll try and make the point somewhere in the article rather than in the first line, obtrusively. On another matter, your Messiah sandbox is most impressive. I won't be able to start writing my stuff for at least another week. When I do, I'll work on the Background and Music Aanalysis sections. We can then decide between us how the gaps are filled. The Percy Young book can be got quite cheaply on Amazon or Abe, so I'll buy it (I am not yet subject to a book-buying embargo, but I must watch my step). Might try ILL for some others. Brianboulton (talk) 12:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Stalking you, I notice the Bruno Walter image. I have uploaded a 1910 public domain photograph if you think that might be preferable: File:Bruno-Walter-1910.jpg. You may not think so, of course. Tim riley (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, yours is a much better image; I'd been searching for something like this. I have posted it, and shifted the other pics arround to accommodate it. Brianboulton (talk) 20:28, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Good; v. pleased. By the bye, (in re caption of pic in article) Walter was German, not Austrian (born in Berlin) - Tim riley (talk) 20:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Corrected. There will be others, of course.... Brianboulton (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I've emailed you a page or so of odds and ends about Phyllis Spurr. Nothing to set the Thames on fire. Tim riley (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks Brianboulton (talk) 18:57, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Piggy-backing onto this thread: Most of the images seem fine, Brian. You might want to eliminate the moire pattern in File:FerrieratEdinburgh.jpg before reducing it in size to satisfy the low resolution requirement though (suggest 272 x 404). File:King-Georges-Hall.jpg is, however, a problem. The uploader (Sparkx 11) identifies here as Paul Sparkes, but calls himself David Hindle in File:Blackburn-Rd-Regeneration.jpg. I note that there are a few photographs in commons:Category:King Georges Hall, Blackburn for this building on Commons. Jappalang (talk) 01:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I took a shot at File:FerrieratEdinburgh.jpg. Have a look. You might want to turn on the Descreening option for your future scans; if you are using the MP Navigator, you might want to select "Magazine (colour)" for Document Type when scanning, according to http://www.justanswer.com/computer/2fqbf-can-t-install-scanner-driver-canon-pixma-mp190.html. Jappalang (talk) 00:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I think the revision to the Ferrier portrait works now. Other advice noted for the future. Brianboulton (talk) 11:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I have an urgent GA nom review to complete (urgent because ArbCom is about to ban the nominator) and then will be right over at Ferrier. Today is review day. I've polished and polished my recent stuff until the copper is starting to show!--Wehwalt (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

My intention is to look at Ferrier's article in the next two days, in case you were waiting on me. Apterygial talk 09:42, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look forward to that. Brianboulton (talk) 10:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Landis

I have landed Kenesaw Mountain Landis at peer review, and am starting work on a couple of peer reviews myself, starting with Tim and the ENO. Landis turned out to be more of a project than I anticipated, but I think it came out quite well. A fellow not well known in the UK, I suspect.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I thought it was his address rather than his name! OK I'll put it on the list. I'm doing ENO also. Brianboulton (talk) 16:36, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Just so you know, another article on our mutual favourite football player! I've sent it to GA for seasoning as I have ample articles close to FAC (Landis will be next) and it gives me the chance at another Four Award.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah, Mr Twinkletoes. He will have my attention in due course. You have "ample articles close to FAC" - how do you do it??? I've been struggling for weeks to get Ferrier to PR, just beginning my Messiah readings, and will be involved with that till end July; can't see any further ahead than that. Any more than two topics at a time fries my poor addled brain, I'm afraid. Brianboulton (talk) 15:41, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Your articles are far more analytic than mine. It's one of my faults, I'm afraid.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Also, my life either seems to be full speed or dead stop. During the quiet times, like now, my recreation is writing Wikipedia.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

Gobrecht dollar

Hi Brian. Thanks for the review on the FAC for Gobrecht dollar! I think you're probably right about the prose and referencing of the article, so I've decided to withdraw it for now and use the two week waiting period to bring the article up to FA standards. Before I do withdraw it, could you please give me your opinion about the makeshift image gallery? I thought it might prove troublesome, but I would really like to salvage the images if possible. If not, I can rework them, removing the less important ones, and place the Sully obverse and the Peale reverse designs somewhere else in the article, perhaps using the "multiple image" template. Thanks again for your time in leaving the thoughtful review!-RHM22 (talk) 23:09, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I have left a reply on the FAC page. Brianboulton (talk) 23:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll check back in with you in a couple of weeks to get your opinion on the article, if that's alright. Hopefully I can get the article up to snuff with the others, because the Gobrecht dollar is a very interesting series, and I hope to bring its story to a wider audience. Generally, rather obscure American coins such as that aren't very accessible to non-numismatists. Wikipedia is a great place where all sorts of obscure topics are brought to millions of eyes daily. Anyway, thanks again for replying to my question, and my apologies for my long winded replies! If my prose were as lengthy, not only would I have no problems with shortness, I would be pushing the size limit! Best, -RHM22 (talk) 00:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Brian. Sorry to bother you again, but I'm working on the Gobrecht article, and I wonder if you could tell me if this sounds better to describe 'medal alignment': "Some of the Gobrecht dollars produced were struck in 'medal alignment', meaning that were the coin held face up, with the obverse facing toward the viewer, and rotated on its horizontal axis, the reverse design would also faced upward." It's a little hard to describe this. If it helps, modern British coins use medal alignment, which I believe is called "turnover" in local numismatic parlance. Most American coins are the opposite, except in certain unusual circumstances, like the Gobrecht.-RHM22 (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vidkun Quisling/archive1

Hey Brian. Could I tempt you into updating you comments? I believe all your comments have now been addressed - very useful, thank you. Regards, - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 20:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Mahler's Third Symphony sets record price

Hi Brian, I think you would have been aware of it; Mahler's personal score for his Third Symphony was sold for a record price.[1] Not sure if it is worthy of mention in Gustav Mahler or Symphony No. 3 (Mahler), though I think we could cop that Sotheby photograph of the score via {{PD-Art}}. Jappalang (talk) 01:58, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I had not picked up on this - most interesting. I don't think this information would fit well into the Mahler article, but it should definitely be included in the symphony article, which is in regrettably poor shape, alas. It needs a loving hand; unfortunately, both of mine are completely occupied at the moment, but I'd very much like, at some future date, to bring the article up to scratch. The third symphony is a wonderful, if exasperating, work that I never tire of hearing – when I have a couple of hours to spare, that is. The posthorn solo in the thirs movement stays in the head for days. Brianboulton (talk) 09:03, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Help with sources

Hi Brian, I'm looking for some help, or rather confirmation, that a list of sources I have would pass the grade at FA level.

They're all books, all related to the Antelope Valley region of California, especially the cities of Palmdale, Lancaster, CA, Rosamond, CA and Mojave, CA, mostly in regards to their history and the valley's gold mining. I've arranged the list by publisher and author, and left little footnotes about each author or publisher where I've managed to find information about them when I think they might be questionable. There's a section at the end of the page about one of the authors, it might help to ascertain whether he is notable enough for an article and/or whether he is a reliable source.

The list is at User:Matthewedwards/Library/AV, please let me know what you think because it's a rather small area of the United States and there isn't much written about the area compared to say, London, Los Angeles, New York. If these books are not suitable RSes, what is the usual course of action for writing about small cities and towns? I remember seeing somewhere that there is a bit of leeway with these types of articles and primary sources, but how much? I have a feeling I'm going to be at a bit of a loss for writing about the area. :( Regards, Matthewedwards :  Chat  19:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm no expert on the subject matter so I can only answer in a general way. Publications by local history societies have usually been accepted as reliable, particularly if the writer has evident distinction in the field. However, there might be difficulties if an article was overly dependent on such sources, so I'd advise you to balance them with works published by some of national publishers that you have listed. Sorry I can't be of more help. Brianboulton (talk) 23:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

Peer review - List of NK Maribor seasons

OK, thank you for your peer review. I will look into it and try to solve all of the current problems you have mentioned. Then I will contact you again if you would be interested in reviewing the article once more. Lp, Ratipok (talk) 18:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello. Could you please tell me what you meant exactly with this sentence (regarding Tables section): "The keys to column headings and colours should precede, not follow, the tables to which they relate." If I understand it correctly then you want me to put the "Key" section that is currently bellow the stats tables, at the head of the tables? Isnt that a bit uncommon? Thx, Ratipok (talk) 00:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Messiah

JSTOR stuff sent to you in two batches of emails. Let me know if they don't penetrate the ether. Tim riley (talk) 21:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Would it be premature of me to move my perf history and recordings section across from my sandbox to the article? Tim riley (talk) 07:15, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
No, by all means do so. The underconstruction banner explains why there will be gaps and imbalances for the moment. Put your sections in after the "Composition and premiere" section (which I am rewriting and will not survive the cut). Much other matetial will be reorganised or written out in due course. PS: JSTOR material received with thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 08:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Done. The Background section is looking v. good now. En passant, applause to Ruhrfisch for providing the ENO Messiah pic which I've snaffled for this article as well as the ENO one. Meanwhile, anything I ought to be doing on this article? Yours to command. Tim riley (talk) 20:51, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I think I have some catch-up to do, in the face of your sterling efforts. I have posted the "Writing history" section though a little more work is needed there. I hope to have an "Early performances" section in place by the end of the weekend, and next week will start on the music analysis. That might be a long job because there's a lot to read and absorb. I'm about to fall asleep now so I'll save my further thoughts for a workpage discussion in the morning. Brianboulton (talk) 23:33, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I wonder if the lead gets to the point in "and interprets the Christian doctrine". I doubt that Handel was very concerned about doctrine. Concept? Perhaps wait until the end of the already admirable reconstruction ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
We've done no work on the lead yet; it will be entirely rewritten when the expansion is complete. I agree with you, incidentally; Jennens might have been concerned about making a doctrinal point, but I'm sure Handel wasn't. Brianboulton (talk) 15:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree. Formal question: should there be a comma after Dublin, Ireland, if the sentence goes on? (not Dublin, Ireland if the ...) Next: the psalms are not from King James, but the Great Bible, I understand. See the section on acts and scenes which I also question. Messiah is remarkably little "scenic", compared to the drama in Bach's Passions, which are "su-re-ly" in scenes. (The music is in my ears, surely.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I think the Psalms extracts are from the Book of Common Prayer rather than the Great Bible, but I will check this out. I have not yet looked in detail at the "acts and scenes" section but I don't think it will survive in its present form. Can I suggest that further points on the work-in-progress are made on the article's talkpage, rather than here, as they may be issues for discussion among other interested editors. Brianboulton (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Archive 35←Archive 39Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43→Archive 45