User talk:Brianboulton/Archive6

Help with Nixon dispute

I am aware that you recently reviewed the Richard Nixon article for WP:GA status. In your review you made suggestions that could improve the article. I have made several edits to improve the article, but the editor User:Sdornan has taken acception to one of my improvments that I made based on NPOV and WP:Bias. I wish to remove the phrase "controversial pardon" to just pardon. It may be controversial to some, but not to everyone based on WP:Bias. Sdornan also feels that it is OK to refer to Nixon's "likely impeachment and conviction" as if it was inevitable, but I wanted to change it to "his likley impeachment for his alledged cover-up" since he was never brought to trial and it would not be safe to just assume that he was going to be convicted, an NPOV problem if there ever was one. Could you help us resolve the problem, or is there another way to solve this problem.--Jojhutton (talk) 00:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Delistings

I add delistings to Wikipedia:Good articles/recent because people monitoring the latest GAs would want to know, IMO. Did you accidentally remove them here.

Farthest South FAC

Hi Brian. Hope you had a fabulous time up there in the Arctic. I have tried looking at this FAC, but RLI, and I just don't have the time these days. As far as I'm concerned, it's worthy of the star, but any support I give can only be based on the quick read of a fascinated reader, rather than the critical review of a FAC reviewer. Sorry. --FactotEm (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats. I'm very pleased to see this one promoted. Impressive. --FactotEm (talk) 19:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Rhinemaidens

Hi Brian, I was just adding another paragraph as you viwited the article. I've shoved it in at the top of the attributes section, I don't know whether you want to move it down.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Have added a handful of corrections to typos. Much impressed by the article! Tim riley (talk) 20:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Alas, I have no notion how to add sound clips. There aren't any Rehingold ones in Wiki Commons, and where could one lay hands on one that isn't in copyright? Tim riley (talk) 16:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Quark

I promise I won't argue; I'm sincerely asking for information. My contention is the current version of Quark, while very impressive-looking, is at best unnecessarily opaque. I actually think that some info in the lead does not belong there... Did you read my (first cut at; not finished) version of the lead? Did you still Support the article as it stands? Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 00:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Image:Albert Pinkham Ryder 004.jpg may be of interest and possibly Image:Rheingold.jpg. If you have enough text to justify the inclusion in copyright pictures of modern productions, then [1] combines an example of (tasteful) nudity and lighting effects. I'm thinking of the blue picture. You can click on Photogra on the left, then Rheingold and then on the picture itself in the row of thumbnails to get a larger version.--Peter cohen (talk) 12:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the positive remarks. If it gets to FA, I expect a credit. As far as sound files are concerned User:Shoemaker's Holidayseems to know a lot about the technology. I suggest speaking to him.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Colton Point State Park questions

Hi Brian, a question has arisen at Talk:Colton_Point_State_Park#Format on possibly moving the "Pine Creek Gorge" section to later in the article, after "History". Since you have made comments on it in the FAC, would you mind weighing in on this? Also, do you think we should add a map showing the park relative to Wellsboro, Ansonia, Williamsport, etc.? (not sure where it would go). I can make one if you think we should, but do not want to unless it is needed. Thanks in advance, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

It's that time again...

I think I've got one close to whipped into shape, so if you could take a gander at Robert of Jumièges and tell me what I've overlooked/messed up/etc I'd greatly appreciate it. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:08, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Not listed as PR or FAC, so do I assume you want me to do a pre-check before you nominate? I'll be glad to do this, but it might take a day or so due to other problems. Brianboulton (talk) 20:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Yep, not up at FAC yet, and did it's PR back in May, and has had some sprucing up by Ruhr since. I looked at Rhinemaidens today, btw. I'm only halfway through sourcing checks at PR, so any chance of me reading it for prose is going to have to wait until after I get through that, but it looked pretty sound to me on a quick glance! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, understood. Rhinemaidens has a way to go yet, I've got to write another section, and sort out other issues. Still, its a change from all that ice, what? Brianboulton (talk) 20:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Water, ice, same diff, right? (grins). My spouse is cracking up about me helping out with a Wagner article, because quite honestly, Wagner's music leaves me cold. Dvorak for me! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments at Robert, i finished off my backlog at PR this morning, so Rhinemaidens are on my radar... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

eo:William Speirs Bruce

Hi Brian,

I'd just like to let you know that I've completed the translation of your very nice article about William Speirs Bruce in Esperanto. I really enjoyed working on it, and will certainly consider translating more of your polar articles in the near future. Best wishes, Thomas Guibal (talk) 04:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Most interesting. It would be fascinating to know what the Esperanto readership of Wikipedia is. Please feel free to translate any of the polar articles. Brianboulton (talk) 09:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Rhinemaidens

A good first step is to check that pre-1923 recordings don't exist. Presuming you mean Das Rheingold (and not some other opera with a confusingly similar name) I have, in fact, I have found one:

http://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/search.php?queryType=@attr%201=1016&query=Rheingold&num=1&start=1&sortBy=&sortOrder=id

Now, we aren't allowed to use the UCSB's restored MP3s, so I, or someone else, would have to restore the .wav from scratch. However, that recording is fully in the Public Domain: all assets of Edison Records were handed over to the American government, who put them into PD.

If you like, put that into the queue on WT:OPERA - see the list of all the Puccini I'm working on? I'm afraid the Puccini's a bit date-sensitive, but I'll start on Das Rheingold as soon as I have Tosca finished. If there's a good reason why you'd need it quicker, though, do say. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Singer refs

I notice that you've been chasing these up and have reffed all except Dernesch. I've found this bio in German [2]. I don't know whetehr people will object to this. As a minimum, we can prove that she sang Wellgunde on the famous live Böhm set. It doesn't cover all three years but at least demonstrates that she sang the part. So we could mention it without year.--Peter cohen (talk) 18:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Most of the recording details came straight from my going through my CD collection. Jurinac for RAI is mentioned Sabor p.228-9. Popp and Jones in connection in the Solti GD are covered at Sabor p.230 - not mentioned in the text one way or the other for Rheingold; the Karajan Rheinmaidens are listed in DG box 457 780-2, but I note that Donath only does Rheingold - patent 1968 for RG, the Janowski pair on BMG 74321 45418 2 (RG) copyright given as 1997 patent 1980 and 74321 45421 2 (DG) (1997/83)--Peter cohen (talk) 19:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Dropping the Janowski is fair enough. The singers are already mentioned in other contexts. Anyway I had smuggled in the Sutherland mention after I had written the original version of the paragraph, so this removal just balances that addition.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Images

I've been unable to trace down an original source for the details. The Met show the picture without any need for attribution. Vol 1 of Cosima's Diaries (in English) has a general disclaimer that unattributed photos came through Dr Dietrich Mack at Bayreuth. Mack was one of the original editors of the diaries. This suggests to me that the photo might well be in the Bayreuth museum but doesn't confirm the existence of any rights holder. Given the diaries were out in 78 then even a change from 50 to 70 years on copyright won't have moved it into copyright. As for the Covent Garden image after my proactively seeking comments and gettting positive feedback on the advice page, it is a bit peevign that an objector has turned up when it all looked settled. I think it still makes clear how lighting can give an underwater effect in a manner that pure text cannot. And we give as much info on this production as any.--Peter cohen (talk) 09:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Colton Point State Park

	<font=3> Thanks again for your careful proofreading and contributions - Colton Point State Park made featured article today! Dincher (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to add my sincerest thanks too - Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words - I too am quite pleased with how the article turned out. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

FACR

Brianboulton/Archive6, you posted at one or more of the recent discussions of short FAs. There's now a proposal to change the featured article criteria that attempts to address this. Please take a look and consider adding your comments to the straw poll there. Mike Christie (talk) 19:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Amazing

Brian, would you take a look at the current version of Amazing Stories and let me know if you think I've fixed the problem with the issues grid? I've split it up into smaller grids; if you have a moment, I'd be glad to know if this works. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 02:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the subdivision of the issues data works well. Great article. Brianboulton (talk) 14:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Reception history of Jane Austen

Reception history of Jane Austen, one of the daughter articles for Jane Austen, is up for peer review here. I would appreciate your thoughts. Awadewit (talk) 20:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Co-nomination

Hi, Brian. I'm happy to be involved. BTW, my investigations have indicated that both Lotte Lehmann and Elisabeth Schumann played RHinemaidens at Vienna and/or Hamburg and/or the Met. They would fill in a gap by providing starry names from the inter-war period, but I've not added them because there's a risk that the list could grow like topsy.--Peter cohen (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. However, with regard to Lehmann & Schumann, the problem is that I've rejigged the last section to emphasise the staging rather than the stars, as part of my argument for retaining the Covent Garden pic on FU. So, best left out, I fear. Brianboulton (talk) 00:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Feel free to go ahead with the nomination. And yes we should each best answer questions that address our own material. I have re-read the whole article and copy-erited it. The most signiicant changes are that I have mentioned that the opening melody is pentatonic and that I have moved the Chicago bungee chords back up to where the pre-war Bayreuth wires are mentioned. I think it makes more sense there than where it was. --Peter cohen (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Tom Crean (explorer) PR

I will be glad to look at it, although it may take me a few days (there are 28 articles on the PR backlog now). I took a quick peek at it and it looks pretty good. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I reviewed it - looks pretty close to FAC to me Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Rhinemaidens

I moved the article as requested and also moved the FAC and fixed the tools there. I messed up the move, but User:CIreland fixed it. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

It was no big problem, I am not the world's most active user of admin tools and just goofed up a step - fortunately it was easily fixed. Good luck on the FAC, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I will try to take a look at the FAC in a day or two - am very busy in real life and here. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Rhinemaidens FAC

Hi. I wasn't thinking of what I was doing as fighting for Schwarz to be included. Just checking out woud count as an adequate reference. Unfortunately shes the biggest name I've identified as singing Flosshilde and it would be nice to retain that info. If the likes of Ferrier, Baker or Ludwig were known to have sung the part, I would dump Schwarz in their favour.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah I've found someone. The Grove Book of Opera Singers says Margarete Matzenauer sang Flosshilde at Bayreuth in 1911.--Peter cohen (talk) 18:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Just saw that it made FA - congratulations! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Whilst

Ho ho ho. I saw your edit summary; gave me a big grin. You know, I did see it, and thought about changing it, but I really don't like doing programmatic language changes. "Whilst" is a real word, and it has its place. I just thought I'd leave it. In this case I think it's better as "while", but my bias against automatically changing all words on a certain list temporarily blinded me. Looks like you have a good reviewer there in Jappalang, by the way! Mike Christie (talk) 01:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Maggie Gyllenhaal

Hi Brian, listen, I was hoping if you could finish up your PR comments for Maggie Gyllenhaal's article, I would totally appreciate it and thank you for taking the time in review the article. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I've responded to your queries. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:45, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Tom Crean

Hi Brian: I started addressing some of the peer review suggestions. Will get back to it a bit later. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Matzenauer Reference

Go ahead and do it. You're obviously more familiar with templates than I am. And an encyclopaedia tempalte does make sense. Of course the book is presumably available in print and the entry is unlikely to have changed since the book ws last printed as it's based on a summary of a book chapter by the same author from around 20-30 years ago. --Peter cohen (talk) 21:28, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Assessors needed for Composers Project

Just to say we're looking for assessors for the Composers Project, see here. Best wishes. --Kleinzach 02:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Edgar Speyer

Thanks for the GA Review comments for Edgar Speyer.--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Should we mention FAC at project pages

It's struck me that nobody who I recognise from the Wagner or opera projects have commented. SHoudl we draw the candidacy to their attention?--Peter cohen (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Fine.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work. I'll insert the mention of Lotte Lehmann and inform the Wagner Project, if you haven't yet done so. And I'll have another go in soliciting interest in producing sound files.--Peter cohen (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hesperides

You know when you mentioned a Hesperides expert turnign up? Well, I've looked at our articleon them and it makes a point that in traditional versions fo the myths, they are not Arcadian. Timothy Gantz's Early Greek Myth discusses sources which place them in the West or in an island of Libya. He doesn't even mention Arcadia to reject it. I suggest you remove the mention of Arcadia.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

PR

Thanks so much for helping with PRs and congrats again on an interesting article making FA. I have two questions concerning the naked Rheinmaidens: 1) what is the orb / sphere in the picture? 2) How did they take curtain calls? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:42, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

With the demands I make on PR, its only right I should help to clear the backlog by doing some reviews. Re the Rhinemaidens, in the ROH production illustrated, the Rhine gold was contained in a large transparent sphere, which Alberich broke into, to steal it. As for the curtain calls, I honestly don't remember. I suppose they were decently covered with shawls, else I think I would have remembered. Brianboulton (talk) 01:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

If everyone did what you did at PR, we would have no or very little backlog, so thanks again. Thanks for answering my slightly silly questions. Take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I will be glad to look at the Mozart family's European travels. It may take me a few days, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Gerard K. O'Neill

Thank you very much for your detailed review of the article. The remaining issues seem fairly straightforward, but I'll let you know if I have any more questions. Wronkiew (talk) 07:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I did have one question for you about your NSS award comment, posted to the review page. Wronkiew (talk) 17:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

FA

This is my first FA nom, do I strike out your suggestions after I complete them, or is that something you do, after you verify I did it. CTJF83Talk 01:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Strikes are optional, but it's normally up to the reviewer to do them. Brianboulton (talk) 08:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! CTJF83Talk 07:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the images! It is greatly appreciated! CTJF83Talk 16:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey, since you seem to be familiar with FAs and such, I had previously asked a user about nominating Neighborhoods of Davenport, Iowa for a GA, but s/he told me to nominate it for a FL, since it is more of a list. Your thoughts? CTJF83Talk 17:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't read it through, but at a glance it looks like an article to me. Go over to WP:FL and see what Featured Lists look like. Without reading it carefully I can't judge how close it is to GA standard, but you will need to request Epicadam to remove the "Onesource" banner, if he is satisfied that this no longer applies, before nominating the article for GA. But I strongly recommend that for the present you concentrate on your current FAC nom. Brianboulton (talk) 18:26, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, good point, I'll work on one at a time! :) CTJF83Talk 18:39, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Aaron Eckhart's peer review

Hey Brian, listen, sorry to bother you again, but I was maybe hoping if you can give some feedback for Aaron Eckhart's article, as I'm trying to aim the article to FA status, once again. If you have time, I would appreciate your comments a lot. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries, as long as you can comment on anything that the article needs fixing, its fine. Please, take your time and don't make it your one priority. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for leaving comments, I'll get to them. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I responded to your queries. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Good and bad news on Crean images

Hi Brian, Thanks for the analysis on the photos, though it's a little disheartening to lose the mug shot and puppies photo. We will have no close up of Crean. Are you sure we can't use the puppies photo under the Australian rules, which classify PD as any photo taken after Jan 1, 1955? It seems to be regardless of the publication date.

The Crean with Skis photo is a good one. I could nominate the article as-is, and let the image expert(s) comment on the puppies photo? Or are you sure it is not defendable? If we lose it we can fall back to "Skis" for the lead. I like the "in sight of our goal" one too, we should use that if the Skis one must become the lead. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Brian: I'd like to leave the puppies image and get the determination in the FA review. If it turns out to be not usable and removed, likely someone in the future is going to come along and try to re-add it, so I think it would be good to document the removal and reason in the FA review. I intended to use you as a co-nominator as you offered, I just wasn't sure of the procedure. From reading your last comment I understand there's a spot in the nomination for me to add you. I'll nominate the article soon, maybe tonight if I can read up on the procedure, although it's getting late and I'm otherwise distracted watching U.S. election results... Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

(a little later)The nomination procedure says to ensure the peer review is archived... I assume because the PR is in "archive1" it is archived? Also, do I remove the "Peer review|archive=1" and replace it with the "fac" tag? But if I do that, will the archive disappear? I'd appreciate any help with this - thanks in advance. Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:41, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Brian: Thanks for archiving the Peer Review. I have nominated Tom Crean (explorer). I think I may have botched adding you as a co-nom though - I missed doing it when I initiated the nomination, then I added a statement about you as the co-nom in the nomination comments on the Crean discussion page. But this did not get reflected back on the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates page. Hopefully you can add yourself properly - sorry for the inconvenience. Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, no response yet from the Tom Crean Society. Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, on your proposal to discuss major issues on our talk pages. It will be interesting to see what feedback we get. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:06, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Mozart map

Map showing the Grand Tour, 1763–66. Black line shows outward journey to London, 1763–64. Ref line shows homeward journey to Salzburg, 1765–66. Occluded line shows travel in each direction

I can try my hand at the map - to be honest, I usually add dots to OMC maps by hand as I usually have trouble getting their dots to work too (maybe we should both ask Awadewit what her secret is, although I seem to recall the Bonn dot on her map is off for some reason). If you would give me a list of cities you want on the map, I will try to add them - assume you want it all labeled and to have a connecting line too? Should there be a color code as in A's map or just one color dots? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Rivers out and borders in should be no problem with OMC, as long as the modern country borders are OK. The map may take me a few days, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I will try to put the dots in with OMC - since there is no rush this may take a while. Will ask as I have questions, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:48, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

OK< here is the map - for some reason OMC is giving a smaller base map now - is this OK? Let me know what tweaks to make (if any). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Glad you like it. I set the width to 300 pixels in the article - images have been loading slowly for some reason, so I think it may be a WP:BYC issue. It loaded and looked fine on my computer. Also fixed a typo in the caption - the occluded lines are red and black both. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)