This is an archive of past discussions with User:Brianboulton. 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.
Yes, though Grogan's account is very vague as to what Jacob actually did. Unfortunately, I seem to have lost my JSTOR access so I can't comment on what the obit says. Brianboulton (talk) 09:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Almost nothing, I'm afraid. The relevant passage merely says that he was a distinguished teacher at the RCM, and a parenthesis lists Imogen, Malcolm Arnold and Elizabeth Maconchy among his pupils. This source says that Jacob taught theory and composition at the RCM (but not that he didn't teach anything else). --Stfg (talk) 10:15, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh, and if you need anything urgently before your JSTOR access is restored, just let me know. --Stfg (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi! Just a quick update that while JSTOR and The Wikipedia Library discuss expanding the partnership, they've gone ahead and extended the pilot access again, until May 31st. Thanks, JSTOR!
It would be really helpful for growing the program if you would fill out this short survey about your usage and experience with JSTOR:
Very pleased to see IH now a featured article. I wonder if it might be prudent to put a note on the article talk page about the use of her given name throughout? I'd be surprised if some well-meaning soul doesn't wander in at some point and try to make her "Holst". A note explaining that this point has been thoroughly considered at the PR and the FAC might help to ward off such attentions. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Afterthought: I think that other than royals (e.g. George VI and the present queen) Gustav and Imogen are the only father and daughter honoured with a WP FA apiece. Tim riley (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
I've been playing hookey for a couple of days. I'm not sure about a note on the talkpage – it might act as a prompt to the aforesaid "well-meaning" soul (or chronic interferer) to do exactly as you suggest. The use of forename was accepted without demur on the Cosima article, and I'd be inclined to leave this one, keep watch, and jump in with the appropriate explanations if the need arises. How is Gielgud? Brianboulton (talk) 18:25, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Don't miss one of my pictures in this edition ;) - DYK that the pictured church is named for the first union between Lutheran and Reformed protestants in Germany, and known for 38 paintings of the Rubens school? - Lovely to see a "bright young" woman featured on the Main page, thank you! - I missed the Imogen review, sorry, but mentioned her on the Chopin talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Nice picture, nice interview: perhaps you could add to the image description an indication as to where Idstein is – not many non-Germans will know. Brianboulton (talk) 09:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Imogen Holst to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks.
Incidentally, you (and your talk-page stalkers) might like to know that the TFA nominations has changed. For an experimental period, nominators no longer have to worry about calculating how many "points" the article has. In addition, there is a new (and hopefully easy-to-use) nomination procedure, using a pre-filled template much like DYK. All feedback on the new system is welcome. BencherliteTalk10:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your good wishes. As to the new TFAR procedures, reform of the points procedure was long overdue and I think the new system will work well. As to my further nominations, I have three composer anniversaries coming up this autumn, relating to Delius, Gustav Holst and Peter Warlock, and another (Tippett) in January. So I may lay off other noms for the time being, unless a real shortage develops in which case I have a few, ancient and modern, which I will bring forward. Thank you for your continuing good and invaluable work on this aspect of the encyclopedia. Brianboulton (talk) 10:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Point taken about the note. I'm back in London with access to my books. I'll set aside a day soon to deal with unfinished business from the Gielgud PR and then ho for FAC. Truth to tell I'm flagging a bit chez Sir John. There's just so much of it! The other Sir John - Falstaff - is shorter, and I'll enjoy going back to him shortly. I also retail state secrets at a very low figure, and can tell you that the twosome responsible for Disraeli are looking at Lord Salisbury. I have RVW in my sights, too, but very distantly. Et toi (if I may)? Tim riley (talk) 20:23, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I understand your feelings re Gielgud. When I was in the throes of Tippett and sinking under the weight, I broke off and did Sibelius's Eighth, returning to Tippett much refreshed (though he still nearly did for me). Salisbury will be a challenge; not a lot of charm or compassion there, but the politics will be fascinating. My own plans don't go further than my current project, on which I am proceeding verrrrry sloooooowly - the Jeremy Thorpe scandal. Visible output by the end of the month, probably. In the back of my mind is the idea that you and I briefly thought that doing Osbert Lancaster as a joint effort might be fun, and I'll be up for that, when the time is ripe. Brianboulton (talk) 20:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Happy to remain signed up for Osbert. I have a fair bit of Lancastriana on my shelves. Something for the autumn, perhaps? Tim riley (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
And, at second hand, though SchroCat is the main target of the attack, I feel worn down by the dimness and insensitivity here. I shall have a brief break, I think. Tim riley (talk) 22:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
And now for something completely different
Yes, Tim and I have staked our plain claim to do Salisbury in August. In the interim, I have completed the much-delayed and much-advertised Babe Ruth, and laid it at peer review here. You will no doubt be distressed at the use of certain jargon, but I daresay it is expected and would cause more comment were I to go out of the way to avoid it. I have managed to secure additional research facilities on a temporary basis, please let me know if I may be of help.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations on your new role as affiliate at the Center for History and New Media. It so happens that I have begun some preliminary research into what may become my first all-American article: the sinking of SS Arctic in 1854. Apart from a couple of books, sources are sparse; if the Center has access to any raw materials, e.g. contemporary newspaper accounts, these could indeed be useful. On the matter of Babe Ruth, I have long accepted that sports have their own language codes; the trick is to use these without descending into tabloid sports journalese. And of course, with Ruth, even most Brits have heard of him and know who he was. I wonder how many cricketers are known by name to the majority of Americans? Brianboulton (talk) 09:51, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I cannot think of any offhand. I will look into the matter. Also, I am going to Norway in June, are there any photographs you need for your Arctic articles? It is another boat, but does get quite far north. Thank you for reviewing. I ran a hasty search, please let me know if you need the below. The full text is not online, but I am going over there to return some books and get others, and can enquire how to obtain it.
The SS Arctic and Professor Johnson.
Academic Journal
(English) By: Warthen HJ Jr, Virginia Medical Monthly [Va Med Mon (1918)], ISSN: 0042-6644, 1974 Jul; Vol. 101 (7), pp. 535-44; Publisher: Medical Society Of Virginia; PMID: 4603129, Database: MEDLINE with Full Text
Subjects: Virginia; Disasters; Ships
Thank you for the congratulations, incidentally. Can you send me an email with your current email address? There seem to be a fair number of articles with "further particulars" of the wreck I think would be of interest to you. I am not sure you have my present email, it should be a gmail address, if you do not have it, use the "email this user" function.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I am frankly envious of the resources that those at universities have at their disposal, and probably make very little use of.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I have WP-emailed you my email address, which is unchanged. I am somewhat intrigued by the "Professor Johnson" article, and would be most grateful if you could let me have this text, also any of the other articles which you can locate relating to the wreck. Ther is no immediate urgency, as I don't expect to do any serious work on the article before May. When it is done, I may well ask you to audit my attempts to adjust to AmEng spellings.
Your Norway cruise sounds interesting. I went to the North Cape, Vardø and Kirkenes a few years ago, when I was still writing polar articles, something I don't really do any more. If your ship gets up to Svalbard, I'd love to see any photographs, just out of interest.
Certainly. We are supposed to call at Ny Alesund, but that's always weather permitting as the ship's boats are used to take us ashore. (it is the June 6 departure on the Ocean Princess, which should give you the itinerary if you are interested in viewing it) At the very least, we will be spending several hours of "scenic cruising" by the island. I've sent you about forty. I will let it go at that for now but I will be quite glad to send you more. They expect this affiliateship to result in the improvement of at least 25 historical articles. There is no requirement that I write them all myself. Once I figure out how to do it in a manner that won't overwhelm me, I do intend to open this up to the FAC community.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
If you have a few minutes to spare – and there is no hurry whatever – pray look in and tell me bluntly if this is yet worth putting up to PR with GA as its ultimate aim. I should probably declare an interest as an ex-offender at HMSO, thus. Eheu fugaces!Tim riley (talk) 22:02, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Of course it's worth a PR, and I'll gladly do it, Postume, O Postume. Just one thing I noticed when I gave the article a quick once-over: the lead says the style guide was written in 1954, while the first section refers to a review in 1948. (Another thing I noticed was that one of the villains of the piece is called Greenbaum). Brianboulton (talk) 22:33, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
That's reassuring. Thank you for that! (American Greenbaums are much more enjoyable to read than English ones, on the evidence before us.) I'm going to do nothing in particular on WP for a week or two, having gone a bit stale, as one occasionally can. Back with Gielgud, Falstaff and Plain Words next month, I hope, and available for PRs, FACs, Masonic Ladies' Nights etc in the interim. Tim riley (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
This is a note to let the main editors of Voyage of the James Caird know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 10, 2014. 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 present, please ask Bencherlite (talk·contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 10, 2014. 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 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
The voyage of the James Caird was a small-boat journey undertaken by Sir Ernest Shackleton and five companions from Elephant Island in the South Shetland Islands to South Georgia in the southern Atlantic Ocean, a distance of 800 nautical miles (1,500 km; 920 mi). In October 1915, Endurance, the ship of the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition of 1914–17, had been crushed by pack ice and sunk in the Weddell Sea, leaving the expedition stranded thousands of miles from safety. In April 1916, when the floe on which they were camped broke up, the crew made their way in the ship's three lifeboats to Elephant Island, where Shackleton decided that the best chance for rescue would be to sail a lifeboat to South Georgia. The James Caird (named after Sir James Key Caird, who had helped finance the expedition) was deemed the most likely to survive the journey. Surviving a series of dangers, including a near capsizing, the boat reached South Georgia after 16 days. Shackleton was then able to organise the relief of the Elephant Island party, and to return his men home without loss of life. The James Caird's voyage is regarded as one of the greatest small-boat journeys ever accomplished. (Full article...)
You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Thak you for telling the reportedly "greatest open-boat journey ever accomplished, a fantastic story of survival, worthy to be told", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Yellowhammer
Hi Brian, sorry to bother you again, especially as I know you are not a Messiaen fan. I've just begun a very long process to work Yellowhammer up to FA. I started with the "In Culture" section because it's the area I know least about. I wonder if you would mind having a look to see if what I've said about Messiaen and Beethoven makes any sense. I originally posted the message here, but the main editor of the Messiaen article appears to be incommunicado. Thanks for any help you can give Jimfbleak - talk to me?15:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
It's no bother. Dealing with Beethoven first: I'd say that Czerny and Schindler "suggested" rather than "claimed" (which is a bit of a tabloid cliché). I had not heard these theories about Beethoven before, but I've read Sylvia Bowden's article, which goes a little further than you do, by suggesting other yellowhammer influences in Beethoven's music: in the Piano Sonatas ops 53 and 57, and possibly the slow movement of the Pastoral Symphony. You may want to expand the text to cover these possibilities. On Messiaen I don't have much material. There is apparently a CD of Birdsong Used in Messiaen's Organ Music which includes yellowhammers, and this article from the Baltimore Sun confirms the recurring song of the yellow-hammer in Meditations sur le Mystere de la Sainte Trinite. You may want to look at this book, which has several references to yellowhammer themes. Alex Ross in The Rest is Noise says a lot about Messiaen and birdsong, but as far I can see doesn't specify yellowhammers. Nor does Paul Griffiths, in his very detailed biographical article on Messiaen for Grove Music Online, in which he, too, has much to say about birdsong generally. I hope these comments help a bit. Please keep in touch as the article develops and I'll be happy to review it when it's ready. Brianboulton (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I'd actually seen the Shenton pages, but your note made me read them properly, so I've now downloaded them and incorporated the material insofar as it's relevant to a biology article, thanks again Jimfbleak - talk to me?05:27, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thorpe affair, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liberal Democrat (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.
Thanks for your note. Apart from additions when it was presented by English Touring Opera (but which I did not see), I don't recall being very involved with this article. Anyway, I've tidied it up a little, and shall see if I can dig up the Guardian piece you mentioned. I did find one from 2003.
Right now, I'm in the middle of a massive expansion of the Donizetti article with books and notes all over the place, so shall have to plough on with it.... All the best, Viva-Verdi (talk) 15:02, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Gubby Allen
If you are not too busy, I'd be grateful if you could take a look at good old Gubby. He's at PR here and your comments would be appreciated. Particularly to make sure I haven't done an unfair hatchet job on him!
I will of course rise to the occasion. I'm not sure there is such a thing as an "unfair" hatchet job on gruesome Gubby, but I suppose there are lines that can't be crossed. Was it shame about your subject that made you leave the above post unsigned? Brianboulton (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I had decided to do this one entirely anonymously! Unfortunately, you have seen through my cunning disguise. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
I'd be delighted to have a look at the Thorpe affair (which I'm equally delighted to be another that I'm too young to remember! Although only just, and I was around at the time...), and should get there this week at some point. Although given that I missed another "seventh wicket" on Gubby, perhaps I should modify your suggestion slightly: retire and become a professional assassin, ensuring that we have plenty of Fair Use images. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:30, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I'll keep it in mind. It won't be immediate – I believe Tim is going to give it a go so I will wait for him. Important article, worthy of careful attention. Brianboulton (talk) 21:14, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks; I appreciate your willingness to help. I'll leave the PR open through at least mid-May, longer if needed, so there's no rush on my end. Cheers! GabeMc(talk|contribs)21:26, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
I found your PR comments most helpful; thanks! It might seem like a lot of the work has already been done, but I feel like the article needs your perspective. Would you please consider providing a full review? GabeMc(talk|contribs)18:22, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Well, OK, I'll do my best. I have two long reviews going at the moment, which I'm doing in instalments while trying to (a) deal with my own article at peer review and (b) do some detailed research on a new project. I'll fit the Sergeant Pepper in–it's a great article—but progress may be a little slooooow for a while! Brianboulton (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
That's wonderful, Brian; thanks! I'm not in a hurry, so please take your time – I'm sure that it will be well worth the wait! GabeMc(talk|contribs)16:26, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Brianboulton. 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.
