User talk:Brianboulton/Archive13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Choral symphony

Welcome back! Hope you had a great trip. :-)

I've made considerable changes to this article and would appreciate another look whenever you have time before peer review is archived. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 00:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you please give me some advice? This article has changed tremendously since you saw it in peer review; however, the review has already been archived. I am tempted to re-list it in peer review once the 14-day waiting period has passed. To me, the article needs more imput before I move it on to FAC. The waiting period would also give me time to tie up any remaining loose ends. Could you please advise me as to your thoughts on this course of action? Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 17:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I'll wait the 14 days, then resubmit it for review. Jonyungk (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Shackletonhead.jpg

File:Shackletonhead.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Shackletonhead.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Shackletonhead.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Next after GNP&BR

Thanks for the support on that one. The next major project is the third of the Yerkes tubes, the Baker Street and Waterloo Railway, which is in early production. First, I have to keep a Featured List alive and I'm working Charles Pearson up to GA condition.--DavidCane (talk) 19:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Clements Markham

Hi Brian, I just got your message about peer review for this article. I see it at FA status so I guess you don't need it anymore. My wife and I had our second child in March, so I haven't had much time for Wikipedia. Maybe later this year I'll get back to it, and try to bring Polaris Expedition to FA. Talk to you later. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your note of congratulations. Nansen is certainly an interesting character. When I get Polaris expedition to FA, then I would like to eventually work on Battle of Ortona, which was a WWII battle waged by Canadian troops in Italy. Zatoichi26 (talk) 00:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

PR limits and something completely different

I have temporarily archived three of BOZ's PR requests and will dearchive them so they are spread out over 4 days. I also left him/her a note. As King Canute learned, you can't stop the tide or PR requests from rolling in...

I could have sworn that you wrote somewhere that two sources referred to the BBC poll about Scott and Shackleton. One is cited, but I cannot find the other and am starting to wonder if I misremembered / hallucinated / made it up (take your pick). If there is another ref from a reliable source, I think it should be added (and might address Calamitybrook's point a biot more thoroughly). If not, I owe Calamitybrook an apology, take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much - may I copy your post on my talk page to the Scott talk page? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
By all means. Brianboulton (talk) 17:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

In case you'd like a break from Smetana

(and BTW, Smetana is looking really great), Symphonic Poems (Liszt) is still in peer review. No problem if you're tied up—just thought you'd like to know FYI. Jonyungk (talk) 01:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'd noticed. I'm almost through with Smetana, and will be bringing it to PR soon. I'll try and look at the Liszt article later today. Brianboulton (talk) 08:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
No hurry. I didn't want to totally derail your progress on Smetana. Jonyungk (talk) 18:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm actually looking at Symphonic Poems (Liszt) now, and will leave comments on the PR page. (Perhaps, when Smetana gets to PR, you'd like to comment on it there?) Brianboulton (talk) 18:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments—and yes, I'd be happy to comment on Smetana when it reaches PR. Jonyungk (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The Day the Earth Stood Still

The peer review was automatically archived by the robot and I saw that you were away until the 4th. Since you have returned I was curious if there was anything else or any comments on what I changed. Thanks for everything so far. --Peppagetlk 23:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Smetana peer review

I have left comments for this on the peer review page. Jonyungk (talk) 20:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

City College

I think I fixed up all the major stuff at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of City University of New York units/archive1. The only thing I didn't do was add the Fall 2007 to the enrollment column. I suspect I'll update it yearly as new factbooks come out, but don't want to rule out people updating individual entries as colleges release data. All the best and thanks for the review. MBisanz talk 19:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Latest Nixon

I have United States Senate election in California, 1950, passed GA, now at PR. It is not quite ready for prime time in my opinion, I need some stats which I may have to do some archives research for, when I go to California in July. Still, I'd welcome your thoughts. I'm aiming to get this to FAC in late July/early August.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

  • AH, Dick Tuck at last!! I will gladly read the article, but give me a day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 23:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
    • I've also started work on your illustrious ancestor, I'm rushing this one because I'd like it to be TFA on August 17, the bicentennial of his death, which is the focus of the celebrations in the UK especially in Birmingham, so please feel free to copyedit on the fly. Right now it is about half done, I think. I've also communicated with someone to get better images of his coins. I will probably skip GA and ask you and possibly others to copyedit quickly and go straight to FAC when it is ready to allow as much time as possible to try to get it passed.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Economy of the Empire of Brazil

I´m sorry. I must confess I didn´t know about the rule of one nomination per day. Although I´ve only asked for two articles (in my whole life in here at Wikipedia). Anyway, thank you for warning me. - --Lecen (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem. If they go into the backlog, I'll list them for successive days. Brianboulton (talk) 14:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

H.M.S. Pinafore

I have submitted the Pinafore article to FAC. Please vote here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/H.M.S. Pinafore/archive1 or let me know if you have any further comments. All the best. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Symphonic Poems (Liszt)

I know you've got your hands full with Smetana at the moment, but I have submitted the Liszt Symphonic Poems article to FAC and would really appreciate your vote and feedback—Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Symphonic Poems (Liszt)/archive1. If you're too tied up, I understand. Either way, thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 00:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

One other question

How long should I wait for the smoke over Smetana to clear before resubmitting Choral symphony for peer review? Had intended to relist it around the 19th or 20th of this month but if Smetana is still in peer review at that time, it might be best to wait longer. Your thoughts? Jonyungk (talk) 01:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Since the bot closed the previous peer review on the 3rd or 4th, I'll probably relist the article on the 18th. Jonyungk (talk) 19:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I relisted Choral symphony at peer review on the 18th per my message above. Jonyungk (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Ponsford

I think the concerns have been replied to/changed. Thanks YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for your review and your assistance with the article. -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The Battered Bride

Just one typo in spelling (nevermind that the opera title originally is Czech), and Smetana might have written an explosive opera on a social issue between spouses... I looked through the three images and one media file in the article and...

  • File:Smetana.jpg: remember I said we could have issues with this one? I found it in: Kavka, Bohuslav (20 June 1905). "O Smetanovych Operachs". Divadlo: Rozhledy po Světě Divadelním (in Czech). 3 (18). Prague: Bohuslav Kavka: p. 367. Retrieved 2009-06-17. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help) No information on when it was taken or who took it... I think it is okay now... but there are better lead images for this article (see below)
  • File:Kecal.jpg: unfortunately, if we trust the author given, then this can never be on Commons for some time. Karel Simunek (CZ, 1869-1942)[1][2] There is no verifiable date of when this was published. I plan to nominate it for deletion in a few days if I am still unable to find something (the current license is definitely wrong). You might wish to save it onto your local drive.
  • File:Prodaná nevěsta.jpg: nice photo, unfortunately it is somewhat in the same category as Kecal. It is quite possible its author may not have died or if he did, less than 70 years ago. This photo is in the Smetana Museum collection, so perhaps information can be obtained, but at this moment this photo has no verifiable data to back up its assertion of publishing or author's death.
  • File:Smetana - Bartered Bride overture.ogg: as mentioned before, still languishing in DR at Commons.

Fortunately...

Regarding the National Geographic magazine, it is available only on the Google Books link I provided (as far as I know, the NG website's archives extends only as far back as 2005). If you are unable to access it the Google Books link, the photos are:

  • "Feeding the Motherless Lamb" - Austrian boy feeding a lamb
  • "The Famous Astronomical Clock of the Old Town Hall of Prague, Dating from 1490 A.D." - I think it has not changed since 1923 and you can get a licensed Flickr photo...
  • "The Royal Palace of Hradcany, at Prague, Bohemia" - Oblique view of the front left, seeing the square and a statue. No pedestrians, just one horse carriage in the mid-ground.
  • "A Slovak Bride and Groom" - they wear boots *grin*, in the "old" costumes. They stand together, slightly apart, facing the viewer.
  • "Powder Tower, at Prague, Bohemia" - ?
  • "General view of Prague from Petrin Hill" - ?
  • "A Bohemian Peasant Girl Working on a Piece of Embroidery" - quite similar costume to the production photo. Side view of her sitting on a low rock wall.
  • "Prague, the 'Rose of Europe, a City of Gardens: One of the Palace Gardens on the Hradcany" - ?
  • "A Bridge Tower in the Old Part of Prague: The Old and the Most Modern [heh, in 1918 that is], Each Beautiful in its Way, Meet in the Older Parts of Prague at Every Step" - Scenic view across the river of old buildings interpersed with new; a bridge, on the right side of the photo, extends into the background from the bottom.
  • "Group of Czech Children of the Poorest Classes: The Little Girls Cheerfully Help Their Mothers, Carrying Home Fodder for the Cattle and Doing Chores" - Little Brats, not too informative for the Bartered Bride article I think.
  • "The Tyn Church of Prague (Formerly Hussite Church)" - Church loming on right side of background. Courtyard occupies foreground with a staute on high pedestal. A few pedestrians.
  • "Slovaks at Postyen Attending a Celebration of Mass on Sunday Morning" - view outside the church; Slovaks kneeling outside the open doors. Caption says it was full inside.
  • "A Public School in Prague, Bohemia" - Meh
  • "General View of the Old City of Prague and the River Vltva, which the Composer Dvorak Immortalized in a Musical Poem" - From a higher vantage ppint than the previous old-new shot and very much further to the right. Side vie w of the bridge; river runs from top left to middle right.
  • "The Hundred-Towered Prague" - distant view of Prague's towers piecring the skies (tiny needles).
  • "The Charles IV Bridge at Prague, Bohemia" - taken on the bridge, looking into the city
  • "A Slovak Peasant Family in Every-day Dress" - Father, mother, grandmother, and two sons, sitting and standing casually spaced at their door.
  • "Young Slovak Beaux" - Two men in embroided trousers and shoes talk to each other
  • "Slovak Mother and Child, Showing Quaint Cradles Used" - Mother rocking a cradle outside home, with grandma looking on.

I would think "A Slovak Bride and Groom" would be more of use; let me know if there is any photo you are interested in. I hope I had not brought too much bad news. Jappalang (talk) 08:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ahh... due to concerns, Google enables viewing of most PD-US books to US servers. If you are accessing the web through a non-US server, you would not be able to see them. I will transfer the photos from Kobbé and Rous onto Commons (bear in mind that the resolution from Google Books is quite... bad) in the coming days. I could do the same for the National Geographic photos as well, but that would be much later. Jappalang (talk) 01:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Mishkin's photos published in Kobbé and Rous are now uploaded to Commons (commons:Category:The Bartered Bride). The production photos might still be copyrighted, so I uploaded them to Wikipedia and replaced the possible copyrighted images in The Bartered Bride.[3] Jappalang (talk) 06:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
This seems to have been missed out in the current article; there is a Czech film adaptation made in 1922 (IMDb, screenshots, synopsis). The director, Oldrich Kmínek, passed away in 1948,[4] thus ruling any image of this film from Commons. Jappalang (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Remember the Czech film above? I raised a potentially interesting question at Wikipedia talk:Public domain#Soundtrack from pre-1923 movies = PD in US. Jappalang (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, Brian. I thought the statements that pre-1923 soundtracks are PD would be good news. However, as one pointed out that they are a rarity, I re-checked and the film I pointed out above is actually made in 1933.[5] There were two earlier films, 1912 and 1922, but they are silent and I doubt the musical tracks, which went along with them, can be obtained. Jappalang (talk) 01:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The overture is in PD. Like many countries, the UK (and all the EU) have copyright on sound recordings treated differently to regular recordings: 50 years from time of publication. Hence, PD. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like I made a mistake in treating the piece under the same rules for private UK works. It is supposed to be the same as for Crown Copyrights. User:Adam Cuerden and Shoemaker's Holiday are right; 50 years is the expiry time. My bad. Jappalang (talk) 03:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

"Non-breaking spaces"

Would you kindly remind me how to do that? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Look at this edit window: 571 performances. Tiresome, I know. Brianboulton (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, will do. Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

star

Brian, I would like to put a star on my user page to indicate Ten Commandments in Roman Catholicism is a page I worked on but it would not be proper to do this unless you, Steve and Richard have that same star on your user pages too. The article would never have passed FA without the combination of help it received from these people. Can you please add this star to your userpage at my request here? Let me know, thanks, NancyHeise talk 22:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Here it is if you would like to put it on your userpage. Thanks again for your tremendous help and outstanding work! Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami

NancyHeise talk 22:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Montevideo

I agree with you - it also has a cleanup banner, which is explicitly not allowed. I imagine you know I have some frequent problem comments that I can copy and paste, so I added the relevant ones - now they have something to ignore ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello

In the discussion re: H.M.S. Pinafore at [6], you refer to a "Page size" tool. What exactly is that, and where can I find more information about it? When I want to know the word count of an article, I copy and paste it to a Microsoft Word document, eliminate image captions, and then use the word count tool. Using this method, the current word count for this article is 11,254, not counting the references, which is very close to what 67.79.157.50 said it was. Your count is only 9,931, which is why I'm curious about the method you use, since there is quite a discrepancy. Thank you for your feedback. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 20:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

On the left-hand side of the page, under the Go/Search buttons, are two boxes, headed "interaction" and "toolbox". The "Page size" tool is usually the last one listed in this toolbox. If your toolbox doesn't list it, go to the WP:HELP page and they will tell you how to download it. I imagine that the higher total produced by your method is that unless you are removing them first, the reference wordings, e.g "ref Smith p. 000 ref ", are included in your count, and there are several hundred of these. Brianboulton (talk) 20:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. "Page size" isn't listed under toolbox, and once I go to WP:HELP I'm not sure where to look. Wikipedia:Tools seemed a likely place, but I don't see anything related to "page size" there. Since I'm not that computer literate, could you please direct me to the specific place I need to go to download this function? And do you have any idea why "page size" isn't in my tool box already? Thanks for your help . . . and patience. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 14:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
It seems that the page size tool is not part of the standard package, and you have to download it (I must have done this sometime, though I can't remember). Anyway, Click here for instructions on downloading the tool. If you have difficulty following these instructions, I suggest you contact User:Dr pda, who invented the tool. Brianboulton (talk) 16:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

His instructions seemed simple enough, but when I clicked on the link your monobook.js to add {{subst:js|User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js}}, I got the response "The webpage cannot be found." I left him a message asking for help. Thanks again for your time and patience! LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 18:33, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Choral symphony peer review

No problem on the delay in looking over Choral symphony and Tchaikovsky and the Five. I knew you might be busy with Smetana for a while; it is a project in which you have a lot invested, and you've done a pretty spectacular job with it so far. Whenever you can look over the articles is fine. As for plans for future music articles, I generally tend to be pretty impulsive but am seriously thinking about revamping Anton Bruckner along the lines of the Smetana article. That will take some time and research before I do any writing. Should I follow through with the article in the coming months, or if another project looks like it is coming close to peer review status, I'll make sure to give you plenty of advance warning. Thanks again for all your help—I truly appreciate it. Jonyungk (talk) 00:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, not realizing what state it was in, I just got a good look at the War of the Romantics article and may put that on my long-term to-do list. It really needs a lot of work. Again, I'll keep you posted as to whether I go through with it and the appropriate timetable if I do, but that may not be for a while. Jonyungk (talk) 21:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your review of Choral symphony. I truly appreciate the time and effort you put into it (which must have been considerable, given the size and complexity of the article). Your comments really spelled out what neeeds to be amended to make this a first class article. By your suggestion, I am working on a history section in my sandbox that will follow the parameters you suggested, and I have already cut down the number of musical examples in variouis sections considerably. It seems the "less is more" philosophy is working well with the piece. Thanks again. Jonyungk (talk) 20:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I finished the History section faster than anticipated and have inserted it into the article. If you have time, could you please look once more at the article? Jonyungk (talk) 22:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you—and happy birthday to you! Jonyungk (talk) 23:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar
For all your continuing contributions to and tireless thrashing through the choral symphony article. You have really earned this. Awarded by — Jonyungk (talk) 02:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

PR backlog maintenance

I will be glad to do the PR backlog duties - thanks for the heads up. I will also read Smetana and review it. Have a good break, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Welkcome back and thanks for the notice. Two will be added tonight and I am working on reviewing some of the easier ones (start or B class or below so you can point on major issues and move on to the next one). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I made some comments on the Smetana peer review as promised too. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Burger King franchises Peer review

Hello, I have mades some changes to the article to address your points in the peer review. Would you please continue through the article and give me some more input? Thank you for your help to this point. --Jeremy (blah blah) 05:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Hamence

Replied YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:18, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: New York Met image (1905) and more photos (on Wikipedia only) for Bride

Easiest solution for the Met house: it was printed as a postcard in 1906.[7]

By the way, there are these photos of the cast of Bartered Bride at the LoC: Ottokar Marak (1872-1939) and Elisabeth Rethberg (she has an article). Concensus is that the {{PD-Bain}} is acceptable. However, these are foreign photos; Rethberg's photo can be stored on Wikipedia only. It was taken by Hugo Erfurth, who died in 1948.[8] Since she was with Dresden Opera until 1922, the photo was likely published on or before that year (publishing means selling the authorisation to make copies), thus qualifying for PD-1923 (but not PD-Old in Germany). Marak's photo might be an issue (unknown country of origin, but likely Europe), but I think it can be tagged PD-Bain and left on Wikipedia. Jappalang (talk) 09:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

H.M.S. Pinafore

It's been promoted. Thanks for all your help! Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:25, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi Brian. Just curious, have you ever considered running for adminship? We need more admins who are familiar with content work at the moment, and I think you'd be an excellent candidate. Just something to consider. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

It is kind of you to suggest this. I have never seen myself as an admin, partly because I am so crap at managing even simple procedures that I don't think I should be let near admin tools. I might do some real damage, like closing down the whole FAC operation or blocking Jimbo Wales. Seriously, though, I have always seen my main Wikipedia contributions as article building and reviewing, and it may be in everyone's interest if I stick to those. Brianboulton (talk) 23:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
So do I, but if you can make it through "Hell Week", and I'm sure you would, it's nice to have. I rarely use the tools, and I had to be talked into running, and I had the RfA from hell, but the tools now and then come in handy, and there's nothing wrong with being an admin, and I'm actually a little proud of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Bedrich Smetana at FAC

Read over the article last night and this morning and have registered my support at FAC. You've really improved the article tremendously in many small ways, both in writing and especially in terms of information. There were several questions about his background, his piano playing, and so on that you had not adressed before; now you have addressed them and rounded out Smetana as an artist and a person even more. I really hope you don't get many comments about the overall length—it's a long article but needs to be to include everything, and you have paced it extraordinarily well. Great job. Jonyungk (talk) 20:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brianboulton/Archive13&oldid=1141257241"