User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 30

Archive 25

←

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

How to use Google maps

(From Nansen FAC page) For future reference, I take my URLs from the "Link" button at the top-right corner of the map's frame. Changes automatically depending on your amount of zoom, your location, and viewing mode (map, satellite, or Earth). _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 04:18, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Fridtjof Nansen at PR

I will be glad to take a look at it - it will probably take me a few days. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, no hurry. Brianboulton (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Me too. I should have time to review it tomorrow (Friday). Finetooth (talk) 04:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

That would be wonderful. Brianboulton (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

You may have got a little carried away with PR requests there: Wikipedia:Peer_review/Fridtjof_Nansen/archive1, Wikipedia:Peer_review/Fridtjof_Nansen/archive2, Wikipedia:Peer_review#Fridtjof_Nansen Yomangani^talk 09:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Can never get enough comments. Yours would be equally welcome, of course. Brianboulton (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I think Yomangani is referring to the double listing of the Nansen article at PR. I'm just starting my review, and that was the first thing I noticed. Would you like me to remove one of them? Finetooth (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I have finished my review, but I hesitate to choose between the two open PRs, and I'm not sure which to remove (or if I should meddle with either). The second one has what looks to me like a more polished intro, which you might want to transfer to the first PR if you close the second. I decided to be unbold in this case and wait to see what happens. Finetooth (talk) 21:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's hiding at User:Finetooth/Sandbox. I tried to post it after getting your most recent note, but I think it takes a bit for the clanking machinery to update the PR files. I'll attempt to post the review in the proper place sometime in the next 24 hours, but you are welcome to read it or copy it from my sandbox. It contains nothing scandalous. Finetooth (talk) 22:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Now posted to the PR and deleted from my sandbox. Finetooth (talk) 04:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Is it ready for review? I might not get to it until tomorrow, feeling a bit groggy today.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, when you're ready, but no particular hurry. I'd like to get some solid feedback by next Friday (20th) after which I am away for a week. No FAC nom before 27th at earliest. Brianboulton (talk) 22:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, then I won't rush.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

The Judd School

If you have the time Brian, I'd really appreciate a quick sources review on the above article. I'm hoping to take it to FAC in the next week or so, once its had a good copyedit. I know how busy you are so don't worry if not. Thanks, Tom (talk) 09:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

On a quick look, the refs look sound and well-presented. A couple of queries: the page range (10–135) looks unusually long, and I wondered if this range is correct. Secondly, ref 88 needs a "pp." not a "p." You might double check for others. Brianboulton (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for looking Brian! Regards the long page range, the years the headmasters were in charge are mentioned throughout the entire book, so I just looked at the first time it was mentioned, and the last time. Is there a better way of presenting this? Tom (talk) 12:13, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

In that case it's not a problem. Brianboulton (talk) 13:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Brian, FYI, I've done some further work on The Judd School regards sources, and updated the FAC page. I'd again welcome your comments. Thanks, Tom (talk) 23:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Kalmus

Brian,

I'm surprized to see my revision of the publication of first orchestra score for Puccini's Tosca by G. Ricordi reverted back to Edwin F. Kalmus by you. From whence do you get this information? According to wikipedia, Edwin F. Kalmus music publish didn't even start as a company until 1927. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petergut (talk • contribs) 11:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

You are right and I was absoluitely wrong. I got muddled somehow, and reverted you too hastily. I have now reverted myself, to your version. Sincere apologies. Brianboulton (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:killer7 FAC

Hello, Brianboulton. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Killer7/archive2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Axem Titanium (talk) 15:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

FAC reviews lacking

Brian, I know you do more than your share, but would you have time to look at:

• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bull Run River (Oregon)/archive1? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'm working on the FAC page now, and I'll get to it shortly. Brianboulton (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Mao in Washington

I bought a ticket for the Met, February 9, 2011, hopefully we will live so long.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's good to have something to look forward to. I hope Tricky Dicky is fully appreciative of our efforts. I bought the CDs for £12 - $18 - (though I have yet to listen to them). I bet the Met cost a lot more. Brianboulton (talk) 20:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, well, I don't go to the Met very often. They put in a very nice ticketing web site, with an integrated seating chart so you can select your actual seat and see the diagram.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:15, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I will also enquire at the Nixon Library when I am there in 2 weeks if they have anything.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

	<font=3> Thanks again for your kind words, helpful comments, and support. Bull Run River made featured article today. Finetooth (talk) 03:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Ricketts Glen FAC

Thanks for your review, support and comments at the Ricketts Glen FAC. The FAC was archived before I could reply, but I have made the changes you suggested in the first two cases, and changed the fish predators sentence to Predators like Chain Pickerel and Largemouth Bass are relatively few in number, and adult fish... Hope this is better. Formal thank spam to follow ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:46, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

	<font=3> Thanks again for your source review, kind words, and support. Ricketts Glen State Park made featured article today. Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:05, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Cubzac-les-Ponts peer review

Thanks for your helpful review of the article Cubzac-les-Ponts. I have tried to address as many issues as possible, and will start to add more information and references soon. Could you give it a quick second look to make sure that I'm more or less on the right path? Cheers, 92.149.4.245 (talk) 16:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC).

A quick glance indicates that you are definitely on the right path so far as general page organisation is concerned; visually, it's already a lot tidier. It would help me if you would briefly indicate on my PR checklist the actions taken in regard to individual points, so that I know what I am looking for. Brianboulton (talk) 18:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Randomblue (talk) 21:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The Harbingers copyedit

		Copy Editor's Barnstar
		I award you this Copy Editor's Barnstar for insisting on clear, comprehensible, and grammatically correct articles. Thanks for the copyedit.-d'oh! talk 03:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Pe̍h-ōe-jī FAC review

Thank you for your helpful comments on the Pe̍h-ōe-jī FAC review page. I've made some changes in response to those comments, and I'd be very interested to hear your opinion on those changes. Thanks! Taiwantaffy (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

André Messager

M. Messager is now at peer review. I know how many calls you have on your time, but if you could find some of it to give the old the boy the once-over I should be very grateful. — Tim riley (talk) 11:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I will do this of course, but I am going to be away for some days after tomorrow, and don't think I can manage it before then. I should manage towards the end of next week, though. Brianboulton (talk) 13:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

At your leisure, sir! — Tim riley (talk) 17:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

WSC FAC

I forgot to reply back to you on this sooner. Sorry about that. I made adjustments on The Whistler Sliding Centre last week per request. Chris (talk) 02:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

They are fixed now. Chris (talk) 13:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:killer7 FAC

Hello, Brianboulton. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Killer7/archive2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Axem Titanium (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2010 (UTC) I replaced the Joystiq ref with one from IGN. It doesn't reproduce the full letter, but it has most of it and still supports the statements. I removed the insert credit reference since it was only one line. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: It never rains...

I will be glad to take care of the backlog for as long as you need me to. I have also been trying to do more peer reviews. Hope all is well with you, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, all is well. This is a long-planned break. I had originally hoped to have Nansen through FAC before I went, but I fell behind schedule. No matter. I hope that PR is relatively quiet while I'm away, or otherwise that lots of volunteers offer their services. Brianboulton (talk) 20:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back - as noted, I am always glad to take care of the backlog (even if you just want a break from it). Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:52, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Rhodes images

I've answered your image question, and I think the simplest course is to remove the Rhodes image. On the subject of images, I have a few questions as images are not my forte! Any help here would be appreciated and would save me a lot of time in future.

• What is the position with regards to anonymous images. For example, I have a few cricket books from the 1930s and 1940s with images which have no author (other pictures in the same books have a named author) or the name of a company. Could these images be used or not?
• Similarly, what about the old cigarette cards? Could they be used if they can be dated?
• There is an image here from an auction catalogue. The picture is anonymous as far as I can see, but the company which published it went out of business in either 1904 or 1906 according to this. Any chance that this could be used?
• What if a photo has a named author but there is no way to trace them?
• Finally, I take it that any old images which are definitely from the 1900s (for example) cannot safely be used unless their publication can be dated to pre-1923 (which would rule out most cricket photos)?

Hope you can help! Thanks. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• I am not a great expert in this area, but I have listened and learned a little over the years. In answer to your questions above, to confirm with US copyright laws, I believe:

• Anonymous images: If the original publication of these photographs was after 1923, they are not in the public domain in the USA and cannot be used.
• Cigarette cards are publications, and can be used if the cards predate 1923.
• Looks promising. If you can decipher the faint wording at bottom left, this may establish when/where the photograph was published.
• If the photograph has been published, it is the publication date that matters. "Author's life plus 70 years" only applies to unpublished works.
• You are correct, but there were plenty of cricket books published before 1923 which have hosts of great photoraphs that can be used. I once had a copy of Ranjitsinhji's Jubilee Book of Cricket (1897) that had some marvellous images. And all the photographs of G W Beldham taken and published in the Edwardian era can be used. I suppose the moral is, if you want images, write articles about ancient cricketers!

I think that if an image is copyright in its country of origin, it may be used regardless of the above rules. However, that belief is subject to confirmation. If I'm right, that helps with more recent photographs published in Australia where the copyright law is less stringent, but not in the UK. Brianboulton (talk) 23:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

[1] Well who else would it have been? EXCUSE ME for trying to help out. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• I don't doubt your good faith, but it seems unlikely, to say the least, that the US Navy would name a housing project in Norfolk, Virginia, for a New Yorker from the 19th century with a distinctly dubious reputation. And nobody has ever called Benjamin Morrell "Ben Morrell". It's not an unusual name, and is much more likely to belong to someone with a close connection to the project or to the area. If you can find a convincing source that confirms that the the project was named for our Benjamin Morrell, then of course your edit can be reinstated. Brianboulton (talk) 23:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  Ben Moreell was quite keen on construction [2] Yomangani^talk 23:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

That page itself has the name spelled two different ways, so I didn't use it. Ben Moreell was on active duty at the time the project was built in 1941 and the Navy is even LESS likely to name a ship/project after a living person on active duty than someone from a different region. It wasn't until the USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) was built in the 1990s that the Navy named a ship after a living person, and he was retired at the time. @Yomangani-that is the project in question, and as I said, the guy in your link was on active duty and the page spells the name two different ways. If you look at the links I used it has it spelled with two R's. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, he was on active duty overseeing a large number of naval construction projects, such as the Ben Morrell (sic) Housing Project (the housing project sponsored by Ben Moreell perhaps, rather than the housing project misnamed in Benjamin Morrell's honour). Regardless, the assumption that it was named in honour of Benjamin Morrell is genuine original research. Yomangani^talk 23:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

This may help too: [3] Yomangani^talk 23:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review

Thanks again I have responded to your peer review feedback and amended the article Illinois (album) accordingly. If you feel like it needs more work, I'd be happy to continue improving it or if you think someone else can take a look at it before I nominate it for FA again, I'd like the extra set of eyes. If you need to respond, please do so on my talk. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Billy Liddell

Hi Brian, I've responded in detail to your suggestions at Liddell's PR. I've implemented the vast majority (I may have neglected some due to distraction....and sleep deprivation!) and given the article yet another (hopefully thorough) copyedit. Have the issues that you identified been adequately addressed or would it benefit from further ce, perhaps from an editor unfamiliar with the article? I've really appreciated your very comprehensive, thoughtful assesment. SoLando (Talk)

Liberty Bell

I'm sure you will be busy when you get back, but if you get a moment, could you review [Liberty Bell's FAC nomination]. Don't expect more patriotic symbols, two is plenty for any topic with me.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Herbert Charles Wilson peer review

Hi Brian - if you're not overly busy, could you maybe take a look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Herbert Charles Wilson/archive1? No rush at all, though. Connormah 21:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll get to it but it may take me a few days. Brianboulton (talk) 22:36, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem at all - like I said, no rush, I can be patient ;) Connormah 03:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Nansen FAC

I'd be glad to make an appearance. Finetooth (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

You are mentioned

Wikipedia:FCDW/3000. Cheers, ResMar 00:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Wannabe peer review

Hi Brian, thank you for your comments on the peer review. I see that you have an article at FAC and probably don't have much time available to finish the other half of the article, just to let you know that I have adressed most of your suggestions but I have some questions on some of them that I posted on the peer review page. Please let me know if you get chance to read them. Regards. Frcm1988 (talk) 07:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you for the kind words and the barnstar, which is an especially good one. I noticed last night that you had signed up for the last PR in the backlog, and I was hoping you'd do it before the next batch came in. (And you did.) A few weeks ago when the backlog was hovering near 20, I thought we might never see zero again, but there it is. Hooray! Finetooth (talk) 21:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

(ec) My thanks for the barnstar and all of your work here too - always a great feeling to have nothing in the backlog. Woo-hoo! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Better Lat than Never

Hello Brian. I hope you are in fine spirits because I come a calling for a favour. My reduced presence on this project during the past few months was not simply from workload alone. One factor was a project I was tackling that turned out to be pretty huge in scope. As it is, I have plunked them down into the project, the Malaysian cartoonist Lat, his best known work The Kampung Boy, and the animated adaptation Kampung Boy (television series). My intention is to first bring Lat to FAC; as such, it is on peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lat/archive1.

Could you take a look at the article and suggest any improvements toward that goal? I would also appreciate a copy-edit. Note that it is a huge article (the largest I have written so far), so take your time or feel free to reject it (do tell me though). Jappalang (talk) 03:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

It's good to have you back. I had noticed Lat at PR, (and wondered about the rhyme you would construct when this comes to FAC; the pun looks ominous). I'll be glad to start the review in a couple of days. Brianboulton (talk) 08:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I just tried it and you can still access the article through the Search box (I am using the new default Vector skin). Just type Lat and press Enter (ignore the drop-down choices), the article should then be loaded. Thank you! Jappalang (talk) 01:16, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that works. The drop-down obliterates the button, but I forgot you can easily clear the list. I am working on the article - it reads well. Brianboulton (talk) 08:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Archive 25

←

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30