Jump to content

User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 64

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 60←Archive 62Archive 63Archive 64

Looksie

Hi Brian, hope all is well. I have just been tuning up an old FA of mine, and I was just wondering if you could look over a section I just rehauled. Just to clarify, I am only asking for help with that section, so it should not be more than a ten minute job, hopefully. Would appreciate the help if you have any time to spare. Of course I could look over something of yours in return; I am glad to oblige. ceranthor 16:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I'll leave some stuff on the article' talkpage later this evening (BST). I may well ask you to look at something for me in a day or two - I'll let you know. Brianboulton (talk) 17:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks! ceranthor 17:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again, and let me know if you need anything. :) ceranthor 21:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Brianboulton. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Denial (Sugababes song)/archive1.
Message added 14:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Till 14:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey did you abandon the review or have you finished? Till 00:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Charming manners. I have completed my review. The article needs to be looked at by others who have better knowledge of the subject than I have. Brianboulton (talk) 10:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Okay thanks. Till 11:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

A quick favour?

Is there any chance you could do a quick source check for lbw? No-one has asked for one, but it is perhaps better to make sure all the boxes are ticked. No problem if you don't have time. And good to see "cricketer" on the front page! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

TFAR / TFAs

Many thanks for your generous offer. You may see from your watchlist that I'm going to experiment with four non-specific date slots at TFAR, so there'll be plenty of opportunities for you to suggest articles there I hope (while making sure that we don't put too much of a TFA-burden on particular writers). I was thinking at L'incoronazione di Poppea for later in the year (as a random nod to its 1643 premiere) but I don't want to run all the classical music articles too close together - variety is the spice of life etc etc. Regards, BencherliteTalk 10:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Music for a Time of War

Update, FYI: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Music for a Time of War/archive1. Feel free to add comments. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 15:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I will definitely look at this in the next couple of days. Brianboulton (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Opera infoboxes

(Tacking new subjects on to old threads is a bad idea. Information gets archived/ignored/forgotten that way; please continue this discussion here)

Did you know that an {{infobox opera}} is in the making? Don't miss to take a look at the examples ;) - Seriously: what do you think of a test as proposed here? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

In line with your comment there, Brian, I think it's a dreadful idea given the timing and the target and very disruptive and have said so there. Voceditenore (talk) 08:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Re [1], I can fully understand where you're coming from.:/ If by any chance Bencherlite doesn't get your message in time, I think (hope!) it won't be disrupted. I can't imagine any project members trying it on while it's a TFA, even the most zealous advocates of boxes, and the non-project protagonist in the conversation is banned from editing TFAs. I think eventually we'll have quite a nice and relatively useful box, which will give the head of article space much more freedom to display relevant images instead of the usual glowering composer. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't expect project members to disrupt the page, but there are zealots with no connection to the project who may well see this as an opportunity. They have disrupted the main page before. I agree that it should be possible to find an acceptable box, and have a few suggestions of my own which I will post; but I would prefer the main page appearance to wait until the matter is sorted out satisfactorily. Brianboulton (talk) 20:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
As said on Bencherlite's page, don't be afraid. The only reason I see to perhaps postpone Carmen a few days is that we have 3 ladies in 3 days, - but then many times we have even more men in a row ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I completely support your approach, Brian. Another problem with monkeying around with an infobox so close to the time of the appearance is that it would probably mean re-arranging the images etc. since the box uses the image that's now in the role section, and it might have been desirable to re-add the composer's image further down, etc. There's no need to have to do all that in a rush. It's ridiculous. The box is basically being planned at Template talk:Infobox opera. It would be really helpful to have your perspective. Knowing you and your work, I'd probably agree with anything you suggested. We're off to California to visit our new little grandson on Saturday. Two blissful weeks "away from my desk". Hopefully, I won't return to find yet another tragedia lirica at the OP. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 20:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Enjoy, "prends garde à toi!" - we do it here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

Thought of you

Last week I read a review of a newly published book about Douglas Mawson [2] and it reminded me of you. I've always been interested in the antarctic explorers, and thought you might be interested to know about this. I'd not read about him previously. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Thanks for pointing this out. I don't do polar exploration articles any more, but I still like reading the histories of the "heroic age" expeditions. Mawson's own account of his expedition is, unfortunately, one of the least readable of the expedition books – he had no literary talent whatever – but a well-written story of his epic survival journey will definitely make good reading. I'll bear this book in mind (I have a birthday coming up in July). Neither the Mawson WP article nor the one on the Australasian Antarctic Expedition are very good, but there is a FA on the Far Eastern Party, not written by me, which summarises Mawson's great escape. Brianboulton (talk) 22:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Carmen TFA

Thanks for your message. I read the threads last night and again earlier today and just now (but wasn't able to post until now). As I understand it, the suggestion of using Carmen's TFA appearance as an opportunity for an infobox experiment has been withdrawn and my feeling is that on balance we might as well let it run. I will do my best to look at it first thing tomorrow when the kids wake up (or before) and see what if anything is going on. Best wishes, BencherliteTalk 21:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Please understand that I meant Carmen's TFA appearance not as an experiment but as showcasing something new, attractive and presentable, - that is withdrawn, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Gusty Hoist ...

...(as he is known to Microsoft's spell checker) is now open for business in the main space, as suggested. I've purged all the lorem ipsum dummy text but have left within the music section a few odds and ends I ran across and thought you might wish to look at (use or discard ad lib, of course). Vittoria and date of Savitri are attended to, thank you. The pundits tell us that despite their friendship Holst's and RVW's music was quite dissimilar: having listened to much of both in the past week or two. I'm blest if I could have told without the CD notes which of them wrote the Somerset Rhapsody and which the Norfolk. Different later on, of course. – Tim riley (talk) 16:42, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Excellent! I repeat: by all means shift anything from the life section that you want in the works (or that is duplicated), and feel free to edit my stuff ad lib. Our sources don't overlap much, I think, apart from Grove Online and the ODNB. I'll be at the ancestral shack in the Lake District from tomorrow for a week or so, but will have web access all right. Tim riley (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Marie Lloyd peer review

Hello Brian, I have listed Marie Lloyd at peer review with a GAC and FAC in mind. It's been three months of intense research, but I'm happy the article is now as complete as it ever could be. If you could spare the time, then It would be great to hear your thoughts. -- CassiantoTalk 16:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course. I shall look forward to reading about this lady, of whom I presently know very little. But bear in mind I am a bit encumbered at present, so it might be a day or two before I get to it. Brianboulton (talk) 18:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
That's great Brian, thank you. There is absolutely no rush, in fact, it will give me time to iron out any little mistakes. Thanks again. -- CassiantoTalk 18:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Kenneth Widmerpool

This is a note to let the main editors of Kenneth Widmerpool know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 23, 2013. 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 all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 23, 2013. 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:

Kenneth Widmerpool is a fictional character in Anthony Powell's novel sequence A Dance to the Music of Time, a 12-volume account of upper-class and bohemian life in Britain between 1920 and 1970. Widmerpool is the antithesis of the sequence's narrator-hero Nicholas Jenkins. Initially presented as a comic, even pathetic figure, he becomes increasingly formidable, powerful and ultimately sinister as the novels progress, his only sphere of failure being his relationships with women. Widmerpool's defining characteristics are lack of culture, small-mindedness and a capacity for intrigue; he is able to achieve his positions of dominance through dogged industry and self-belief. Thus he represents the meritocratic middle class's challenge to the declining power of the "establishment", revealed to have few defences against such an assault. Among suggested real-life models have been Edward Heath, the British prime minister 1970–74, and Reginald Manningham-Buller, who was Britain's Attorney General in the 1950s; Powell gave little encouragement to such theorising. The novel sequence ends with Widemerpool's death, in bizarre circumstances arising from his involvement with a New Age-type cult. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Rescheduled to 23rd April to allow Johann von Klenau to appear on his 255th birthday. Now KW is a little something for St George's Day... BencherliteTalk 08:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Reginald Heber

This is a note to let the main editors of Reginald Heber know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 21, 2013. 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 all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 21, 2013. 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:

Reginald Heber

Reginald Heber (1783–1826) was an English clergyman, traveller, man of letters and hymn-writer, who served as the Anglican Bishop of Calcutta. After graduating from Oxford University, where he gained a reputation as a poet, he undertook an extended tour of Scandinavia, Russia and central Europe at the height of the Napoleonic Wars. After ordination in 1807 he took over his father's old parish of Hodnet in Shropshire, where he combined his pastoral duties with other church offices and literary work. He was consecrated Bishop of Calcutta in October 1823. During his short episcopate he worked hard to improve the spiritual and general living conditions of his flock, before a combination of arduous duties, hostile climate and indifferent health brought about his collapse and death at the age of 42. Monuments were erected to his memory in India and in St Paul's Cathedral, London. Several of his hymns have survived into the 21st century; one of these, "Holy, Holy, Holy", is a popular and widely known hymn for Trinity Sunday. Some recent commentators have asserted that the paternalism and imperial assumptions expressed in his hymns are outdated and generally unacceptable in the modern world. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Kenneth Widmerpool

This is a note to let the main editors of Kenneth Widmerpool know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 23, 2013. 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 all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 23, 2013. 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:

Kenneth Widmerpool is a fictional character in Anthony Powell's novel sequence A Dance to the Music of Time, a 12-volume account of upper-class and bohemian life in Britain between 1920 and 1970. Widmerpool is the antithesis of the sequence's narrator-hero Nicholas Jenkins. Initially presented as a comic, even pathetic figure, he becomes increasingly formidable, powerful and ultimately sinister as the novels progress, his only sphere of failure being his relationships with women. Widmerpool's defining characteristics are lack of culture, small-mindedness and a capacity for intrigue; he is able to achieve his positions of dominance through dogged industry and self-belief. Thus he represents the meritocratic middle class's challenge to the declining power of the "establishment", revealed to have few defences against such an assault. Among suggested real-life models have been Edward Heath, the British prime minister 1970–74, and Reginald Manningham-Buller, who was Britain's Attorney General in the 1950s; Powell gave little encouragement to such theorising. The novel sequence ends with Widemerpool's death, in bizarre circumstances arising from his involvement with a New Age-type cult. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Old Ezra

You may recall Ezra Meeker from his show-stealing appearance in Oregon Trail Memorial half dollar. Now he has his own stage to stand on; I've done a bit of improvement and taken him to to peer review and I hope you will weigh in with the usual. Utterly amazed no one has seen fit to work on this article much before.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:21, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I remember him well – who could forget that great mugshot? I think your "bit of improvement" is overmodest; this is a major extension from a 1000-word outline. I look forward to reviewing it, though I have to do Marie Lloyd first, so it might be a bit later in the week. Brianboulton (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
There is no hurry. It is rare these days that I feel real enthusiasm about writing an article, I am afraid I am old and jaded. Meeker's story I wanted to tell. Thank you for the kind words. I am contemplating writing an article just about the 1906 to 1908 expedition, but will have to see.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:30, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Could you wait a few days more on the remainder of this? I have been in touch with an expert on Meeker, who penned two of the books in the biblio and he has sent me a somewhat long list of suggestions I need to work though, as well as some materials. Actually, the meeting with Oliver Meeker was one of the points he had an issue with, it seems that Ezra was not always completely truthful (or memory had faded, which it had every opportunity to do). Thank you for the comments.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Fine - just tell me when you want me to go on. Brianboulton (talk) 23:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Most likely Wednesday or Thursday … thank you for the kind words on the Migration section, I was definitely trying for a certain effect, and I'm pleased you picked up on it.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm up to date on his comments, though I expect additional ones from him (I have not yet dealt with most of yours, alas, but expect to do so in the morning). I see no reason why you should not go ahead, if you are minded to. Thanks to your efforts to date.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:04, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Up to date on yours too. No rush on a resumption, I'm going down to the sea in ship in two days, so my online presence will be less than constant.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Bird talk

I'm writing a potential FA on the Eurasian Blackcap. As part of the "In culture" section (quite a surprise, I wasn't expecting anything), I've put The Blackcap's call symbolises St Francis in Messiaen's opera, Saint-François d'Assise. I have multiple RS sources for that, but I can't seem to find what instrument(s) represent the bird. Its "call" is usually contrasted with other instruments representing the saint, like the violin or trombone. I'm a musical illiterate, can you help? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Jim. I am not a Messiaen expert – I was rather put off St Francis when a critic said that it "made Parsifal seem like an intermezzo". I've done a bit of digging, unfortunately to little effect. In his Grove article on the opera, Peter Griffiths relates several birds to their instruments (skylark/xylophones, mistlethrush/clarinet, chaffinch/violins) but irritatingly, he doesn't mention the blackcap. I've checked out several of my operatic tomes, and they're no help either. If Hill's Messiaen Companion doesn't specify, the only source I can think of is the opera's published score, which may not be easy to find - probably a music library would have it. If I get any other ideas I'll let you know. Brianboulton (talk) 09:32, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Google Books – "Olivier Messiaen and the Music of Time" mentions violins but "Saints in the Limelight: Representations of the Religious Quest on the Post-1945 Operatic Stage" mentions a 17-part woodwind ensemble. Hope this helps. BencherliteTalk 10:39, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, your first source also mentions the trumpet. Since it's not just a single instrument, probably better to leave it undefined. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Also this from the unpaginated Messiaen Companion – woodwind and trilling triangle. So it looks a wise decision to leave it unspecified. Brianboulton (talk) 13:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:34, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

The Rite of Spring

Hi, Brian! Were you still planning to work this into a TFA? If you are, I'll be glad to help. Despite a hectic schedule, I'm trying to make more room for Wiki editing and have the two-volume Taruskin tome on Stravinsky upon which to fall back. If not, I'll continue plunking along on Copland's Connotations. Jonyungk (talk) 14:28, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

(watching) it's a FA, pending to appear on 29 May, you can write a blurb here now, to go on the requests when 28 April is scheduled, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I have this in hand; I don't want to prepare the blurb just yet, nor draw too much attention to the article in the run-up to the centenary. Play it cool for the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Cool ;) - Carmen was cool, right? Both are rather hot topics, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Best of luck then. Sounds like, with having all in hand, the last thing you need or desire is another set of hands. Look forward to seeing this on the Main page. Jonyungk (talk) 13:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Music for a Time of War review

Thank you so much for your thorough review. Would you mind taking a look at my responses? Be sure to see my question at the end of the "Second invitation to Spring for Music and cancellation" section. Happy to address further comments or concerns. Thanks again! --Another Believer (Talk) 22:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Seeing red

The bot known as Module:Citation/CS1 has been leaving red error messages in the sources sections of some of the articles I've worked on. See, for example, George Lansbury and Peter Warlock. The "errors" seem to relate to the authorlink parameters in cite book templates. I can't see any errors; if anyone wiser than I can see what it is that I'm doing wrong (and I've been doing the same thing for years), would they be kind enough to tll me? Brianboulton (talk) 19:26, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Brian, I got rid of some red on Peter Warlock by deleting a field. [3]. I'd guess the template has changed and no longer reads the field, which would be okay, but not okay, imo, to put red error messages in place. Also, I found this thread about error messages on the talk page of the Module you've linked above. I haven't read it all, but seems to be about what you're experiencing. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks TK for picking up on this. Your solution works on the Warlock article, but not on the Patricia Hollis source in the Lansbury article. Unless I am missing something obvious, the only way of losing the red message seems to be to delete the authorlink field. This is what I have had to do on the Jane Cobden article, where Hollis is also a source, because I've just nominated the Cobden article at FAC and I don't want red messages there. I can't begin to follow the gobbledook discussion on the CS1 talk page; it is sadly typical that when such changes are introduced they tend to go off at half cock, leaving confusion and irritation in their wake. If there's no simple answer, I'll just sit it out until there is. Brianboulton (talk) 21:42, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I suspect there's not a simple answer because it looks as though the templates are being re-designed. I manually removed the error field, [4], and the red went away. It's not a good solution though. I noticed Jane Cobden a few moments ago when I ventured to FAC to submit Isabeau of Bavaria. Cobden looks interesting - will probably give it a read a bit later after a break. Good luck with the red - that would annoy me. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:54, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I'll give Isabeau a look in, if you don't mind, though it may take me a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Your FAC Review of Duino Elegies

I addressed the concerns you had with citations and the "influence" section, and would appreciate it if you took a second look at the article. If possible, I would hope you could support its candidacy.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:51, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Best not ask for support - that amounts to canvassing, which I am sure was not your intention. I will look at the article shortly; I think mine was only a partial review, and I may not be able to base a definite declaration on it. Brianboulton (talk) 15:00, 14 April 2013 (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.

Gustav Holst (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to PPP, FFF, La Mer and Michael Kennedy

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

Front Page

Congratulations on Reginald heber article on the front page. did he play rugby for England/? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.115.78 (talk) 07:49, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Congrats too

Well done on Heber. On Meeker, I'd be grateful for a second run through, to catch any further glitches before FAC, though even if Longacre is promoted in the next week, I'll probably wait on Meeker until the next vacancy.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Signpost dispatches

Hi, thanks for the note on my talk page. Your ideas are exactly what I'm looking for, and publishing it on a monthly basis would work well. Please think it over and get back to me when you have a chance! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Toolserver problems

I am experiencing difficulties linking on to certain tools, in particular the "Contributions" link on article history pages, and the disambiguations link in the peer review toolbox. Either I get timed out, or a "Not found" message appears. I wonder if this is a general problem? I have recently replaced my laptop, which might be a factor. Any suggestions? Brianboulton (talk) 15:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Me too. The dab link checker is decidedly unwell. Tim riley (talk) 15:31, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Gustav Holst

To peer review by all means. I have good feelings about this article. Will you do the honours or shall I? Tim riley (talk) 15:31, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I think, as the principal author, you should. Like you, I think the article is now in pretty good shape - I enjoyed your sections much more than mine, which were quite heavy going to write. I do not wish to find myself at the mercy of AEF Dickinson in a hurry. Brianboulton (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Social history of viruses/archive1

Hello Brian,

I have an article at PR, which is not receiving much attention. Would you have time to comment? Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Certainly - though my comments will be limited to prose and presentation, since my scientific knowledge (I didn't even sit O level biology) is somewhat deficient. I'll try and get to it within 24 hours. Brianboulton (talk) 16:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Ezra redux

Longacre has been promoted at long last. Assuming you are able to give Old Ezra a final look-at in the next few days, I will await that as I think it will be well-received at FAC. Thanks for your help with both articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:45, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I will do a final readthrough on Ezra either today or tomorrow; I agree this engaging article should go down well at FAC and look forward to seeing it there. Are you still at sea? If so I hope you'll find time to look at the latest Riley/Boulton effort, Gustav Holst, now seeking attention at PR (He was a contemporary of Delius and Percy Grainger, but a much nicer man than either). Brianboulton (talk) 09:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I am (some say I always am). I shall get to it in the next day or two as well. It is easy enough to review offline, as internet is rather dear, then log back in to post. I have it down to a science.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

Holst PR

In response to Wehwalt's comments (top-notch, natch) I have asked for your comments on the two points on which I don't altogether concur. When you have a moment, pray ponder. 19:00, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Tim riley (talk) 19:01, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Jack Hobbs

I've put Jack Hobbs at PR here, and would as ever appreciate your comments and suggestions. I'm afraid it's a monster, but is on similar lines to Hutton and, in my view, justified in terms of his significance and legacy. Of course, feel free to tear me apart on that one. I've been at this one for a while and suspect I can't see the wood for the trees. I will obviously understand if you have neither the time nor the inclination, but in any case please let me know if I can return any favours. Thanks. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:08, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll certainly review it. It may be a day or two before I begin, and I will deliver in instalments in view of the length. If I see obvious instances of overdetailing or circumlocutory prose, I may just dive in and edit rather than list points for you, but you will be able to see what I'm doing. Hobbs deserves a decent article. Brianboulton (talk) 22:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Archive 60←Archive 62Archive 63Archive 64
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brianboulton/Archive_64&oldid=1141257236"