Jump to content

User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 65

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 60←Archive 63Archive 64Archive 65

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jane Joseph, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St Paul's School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Reminder on Rite

Nominate for TFA on 9 May or as soon as possible thereafter. Brianboulton (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Jane Joseph

Check spelling middle name 95.144.115.24 (talk) 10:36, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

"Marian" agrees with Grove online and Gibbs so I don't see a problem. Brianboulton (talk) 10:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

URGENT!

Would someone - anyone - please tell me how to get the orange message notification bar back? This change of system, to a tiny anus-like indicator which I didn't spot for days, was not asked for, nor explained, it was simply imposed on everybody. Why such meddling? Why no advance discussion? Or, if there was some discussion, somewhere, why was it not made general? Editors should be free to decide what system of notification they prefer – those who like the anus can keep it, but for the rest of us, Bring Back the Bar! Brianboulton (talk) 23:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

(wandering randomly into somebody else's home, like my dim-witted dog used to do) Um… "anus-like"? That seems a strange comparison. Anyway, because this is Wikipedia, there are already at least two discussions (WP:Village pump (technical)#Orange message bar and WT:Notifications#Do we want the orange bar?) about this issue, plus a script (User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/orangeBar.js) that somebody devised to imitate the orange bar. I don't care for this change myself—I sort of liked the orange bar, although apparently a lot of people hated it—but I didn't feel strongly enough about it to do anything in particular. But now that you've likened the red note to an anus, I may just have to get the script. A. Parrot (talk) 23:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for those links - and see the section below at notifications: "Bla bla bla ... we'll be holding an IRC office hours chat to discuss these new designs and the new notification tool next Wednesday, May 8th at 20:00 UTC (1pm PT). We hope some of you can join us then, for a constructive conversation about our next steps." You can share your insight there Brian; it's certainly made me look at the thing in a different light. Johnbod (talk) 02:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, I loaded the script for the imitation orange bar, but obviously didn't do it right, as the bar did not reappear with the test message, below. If my ire has not cooled, I will visit the office hours discussion on Wednesday with my anatomical analogy (that word again!), and see if if I can change any hearts and minds. Brianboulton (talk) 09:21, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Testing testing testing

did that work? IP address 09:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I see the problem has been solved - I tried copying my copy of the script to yours before I saw the problem had been fixed. At least this message tests your new orange bar. ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:53, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It sure does - and the new bar tells you who the messenger is, so it's an improvement on the old! Thanks for your efforts, anyway. Brianboulton (talk) 08:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Another go

What about this now? 95.144.114.212 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

And again? 95.144.114.212 (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
No and no. Brianboulton (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

One last time...

Hey, Brianboulton, I happened to stumble across this, and it looks like you're having some trouble installing my script. I think I found the problem: you put a '*' character in front of the importScript thing on User:Brianboulton/common.js, which will break it. (Javascript, like most programming/scripting languages, is finicky like that.) I've removed it for you; let me know if it still isn't working. (You might have to bypass your cache again to get it to work). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Writ Keeper! Your magic worked, and I have the bar again. Thank you very much for stopping by, diagnosing and fixing the problem. Brianboulton (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
No problem at all; happy to help. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Michael Flanders

Thank you very much, sir! I shall enjoy following up the points you raise. Tim riley (talk) 13:58, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Holst - deleted line

I am complicit in this, I confess. I clocked the deletion at the time, pondered, thought it fair enough, and took no action. I think the editor's comment that folk music oughtn't to be emphasised more than various equally strong influences seemed convincing. Happy to discuss further if you remain unhappy with the deletion. Tim riley (talk) 15:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Later, having pondered again. I think your suggested replacement sentence "His distinctive compositional style was the product of many influences, including the English folksong revival of the early 20th century" will satisfy all comers, and sums up the facts of the matter concisely and elegantly. I think you should add it forthwith. Tim riley (talk) 16:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Rite of Spring nominated

I've nominated The Rite of Spring as a featured article for May 29th. Hope that's okay. Musanim (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. I have my own blurb prepared, with an appropriate image, which I will bring on to the request page shortly. Brianboulton (talk) 21:38, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Jane Joseph

I rather agree about putting too much trust in MusicWeb in general, but you're on safe ground with Philip L Scowcroft, who has contributed articles to the current Grove on English composers so obscure that I – or you, I hazard – have never heard of them (Hubert Bath, John Ansell, George Howard Clutsam, Reginald King, Bertram Walton O'Donnell, Wilfrid Ernest Sanderson, Archibald Joyce and Henry Geehl) as well as a few I have heard of (Ernest Tomlinson, Robert Docker, Arthur Wood, Haydn Wood, Alfred Reynolds, Albert W Ketèlbey and Frederic Curzon.) You've seen the 1999 Tempo article on Joseph by Alan Gibbs, I assume.

As to recordings, it's difficult as aways to prove a negative, but I have drawn a complete blank so far as commercial recordings of JJ's works are concerned. I checked some ancient Gramophone catalogues and also CD era ones from 1990, 2001 and 2008 – not a sausage! Nothing in WorldCat (a better resource for sound recordings than is always realised). There is in the BL's audio catalogue a recording of one of her songs, "A little child there is y-born" but that's from the National Sound Archives or some such, and was never released publicly as far as I can see.

A meagre gleaning, but I hope it's marginally useful. – Tim riley (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything wrong with using MusicWeb as a courtesy link to articles by an established musical writer. Of the composers you mention, Reginald King was a light music composer (I remember his obituary about 20 years ago, saying he'd made over 1000 broadcasts, and at that time I'd never heard of him). Haydn Wood and Ketelbey are quite well known (how clever of you to clock the accent). The Tempo article is one of my sources; most of it is incorporated into Gibbs's chapter on Joseph in Holst Among Friends. Her carol "A little child there is y-born" was broadcast by the BBC in 1995 and I suspect that is the basis of the BL entry. Anyhow, this information is a much assistance and I am very grateful for your efforts. The Joseph article comes on apace, and might be peer-reviewable next week. Brianboulton (talk) 14:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the orange bar! I reduced the size of File:JaneJoseph.jpg a bit (since it is Fair Use) and adjusted the levels while I was at it. Do you like it better this way? You may have to WP:BYC to see the changes. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, that's a better image, possibly a bit on the dark side. Could it be a couple of shades lighter, if that's not a bother? Brianboulton (talk) 09:02, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I lightened it a bit and deleted my previous upload (minimal versions allowed as fair use). Once again you will have to WP:BYC to see the change, but it does look better on my screen. Once you are fine with this, let me know as I then should delete your original upload (so WP only has one version of a fair use image). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

Re source review for ICFL

I have replied back. Btw thanks for the source check. Best, jonatalk to me 18:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Done with your second comments. Best, jonatalk to me 15:01, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Antarctica

Hi Brian,

I've recently started working for the British Antarctic Survey (as their librarian, of all things) and I've been skimming the various Antarctic-related articles to see what they're like. I was pleasantly surprised to see the rich crop of historic FAs, a lot of which you seem to have written - I particularly enjoyed Farthest South, an unusual concept for an article handled very interestingly.

If you find yourself returning to the topic, please do feel free to give me a shout - I can't promise expert advice, but we do have a wide-ranging library and I'd be happy to give what help I can! Andrew Gray (talk) 23:20, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Andrew, nice to hear from you. My first couple of years as a WP editor were largely spent on articles about the "Heroic Age" expeditions to Antarctica. I was able to draw on a fairly large (150+) library mainly accumulated by my father, who was a keen mountain climber (an associate of John Hunt) and an aficionado of Arctic and Antarctic explorations. I added a few recent books myself. After I'd covered the main British expeditions and personalities, I rather ran out of steam, though a couple of years ago I helped out on the Amundsen expedition centenary article. I have generally moved on to other things, though from time to time I think about returning to the ice. One expedition that has always intrigued me is Shirase's Japanese expedition, poorly served by its current WP article and indeed by published accounts. The chapter in Chris Turney's recent book 1912... is the longest account I've ever read of this bittersweet expedition. If I do decide to go South again, that's probably the article I would choose to write. I'll certainly give you a ping if I decide to do this. Best wishes, Brianboulton (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Toolserver RIP

Since toolserver.org has obviously died, is there a clever, well-informed admin (Wehwalt, Johnbod, Ruhrfisch, Ealdgyth - the last-named not an admin but very well informed) who can advise me how I can carry out the former toolserver functions, e.g. checking for links to dab pages, checking external links, checking contribution history, etc? It is many days since I have been able to carry out these checks. The Wikipedia:Toolserver talk page indicates that I am not alone with these difficulties, and suggests that this might be due a technical change being instituted, but there is no real information there. Does anyone know what's going on? Brianboulton (talk) 14:19, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I have not the slightest clue. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:23, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
(ec) I'm not an admin either, & very much on the non-technical end of the spectrum. Yes, it's a big concern. The German chapter are in charge of this, with significant funding from others including WMUK, but so far seem to be demonstrating that WMF & the National Health Service aren't the only ones who can't bring in biggish IT projects on time. Will we have to wait for a new WMF CEO to get a grip? Maybe. Meanwhile some things happen, such as the new notifications thingy which brought this mention of me swiftly to my attention. You probably have to sign up here to find out what is going, but I imagine that has way too much information, & most in techno-speak. There is clearly far too little on the medi-wiki pages. Signpost ought to cover this better. Johnbod (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I am an admin, but I do not know anything else about the demise of Toolserver. I do know that the bot that archives Peer Reviews was run on the Toolserver (and did not archive today). I will check with CBM and see if he knows anything new. Thanks for raising this issue, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:38, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea. I noticed because the page size function was no longer working. I will ask around, though.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
My page size function never stopped working. And, strange and wonderful to behold, it seems that the malfunctioning toolserver links (dablink checker, external links checker, contribution history, etc) have all come back to life. They all worked for me this morning, anyway. This may or may not be permanent, but it seems that something is happening. Thanks to all above for their comments. Brianboulton (talk) 09:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
CBM said the Toolserver is back up, but that automated bot tasks are queued but not running (so the peer reviews were not archived this morning, for example). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:John Le Mesurier

Hi, I wondered if you could provide some input into the discussion at the bottom of the page involving a dispute over a fact in this FA article.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: The Rite of Spring

This is a note to let the main editors of The Rite of Spring know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 29, 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/May 29, 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:

Dancers from 1913 production of The Rite of Spring

The Rite of Spring is a ballet and orchestral concert work by the Russian composer Igor Stravinsky. It was written for the 1913 Paris season of Sergei Diaghilev's Ballets Russes company, with choreography by Vaslav Nijinsky and stage designs and costumes by Nicholas Roerich (pictured). The ballet caused a near-riot in the audience when first performed, on 29 May 1913 at the Théâtre des Champs-Élysées in Paris, but rapidly achieved success as a concert piece and later became recognised as one of the most influential musical works of the 20th century. The score has many novel features, including experiments in tonality, metre, rhythm, stress and dissonance. The scenario is the celebration of spring by various primitive rituals, at the end of which a sacrificial victim dances herself to death. After its explosive premiere the ballet was unperformed until the 1920s, when Léonide Massine's rechoreographed version was the first of many innovative productions directed by the world's leading ballet-masters. Providing "endless stimulation for performers and listeners" alike, The Rite is among the most recorded works in the classical repertoire. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

More Hobbs

Just to let you know that Mr Hobbs is now at FAC here. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Noted, and will visit. I may have a review request, shortly. Brianboulton (talk) 21:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

RFC on TFA images

Dear Brianboulton, you may be interested in a discussion that I've started at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article#Request for comment - images in TFA blurbs. All views welcome. BencherliteTalk 16:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Do not imagine I have failed to spot your addition, which pleased me very much. No reply needed to this. Tim riley (talk) 14:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Jane Joseph

A pleasure. I'm at the ancestral shack by Derwentwater, but we have broadband and I have been dipping in. Jane Joseph will be a welcome diversion from preliminary sandbox efforts to get the Benjamin Britten article up to FA in time for his centenary in the autumn. I have once again landed on my feet with a lead collaborator who is happy to look after the music section (almost non-existent at present) while I have the much easier job of doing the life. But I can't warm to the Britten (still less to the Pears) who emerges from the numerous books about him, and, as I hardly need tell the biographer of Waugh, Driberg and Grainger, it's rather wearing to write about people one is pleased not to have met. I shall enjoy playing truant with the benevolent Jane. Tim riley (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, not to mention Fred, Peter Warlock and, years ago, Bedřich Smetana... and I'm none to sure about about Cardus, either. And of course, there was the fictional Widmerpool. I know how to pick 'em. I look forward to your comments. Brianboulton (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm more than happy to have a look; hopefully this weekend. And if we are moaning about unpleasant characters, I'm currently struggling to get to grips with Gubby Allen. Possibly the least pleasant cricketer of the lot, which is quite an achievement. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Have I not already namedropped the occasion when Cardus sent me up in public? I keep hearing how horrible G O Allen was and look forward to seeing Sarastro's article in due course. Meanwhile, I have commented on Jane Joseph, who was someone anyone would surely have enjoyed meeting. How sad that she died so young! Tim riley (talk) 22:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
I've added my few comments, of which the most significant is the religion angle also caught by Tim. Jumping ship momentarily, will be home Tuesday, hopefully it is still there (although neither the alarm company nor my nosy neighbor has called, which is promising). When I get home, I have two joint projects awaiting my starting and two more awaiting the contributions of others, four or five coins already lined up for FAC, and I am giving some thought, after seeing Lincoln, to Thaddeus Stevens, who is memorably portrayed in the film. There are several biographies, but not too many, and I already have most of the literature on Reconstruction from the Johnson project.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Tichborne case

This is a note to let the main editors of Tichborne case know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on June 1, 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/June 1, 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:

The Tichborne Claimant

The Tichborne case, a Victorian legal cause célèbre, concerned the claim by an individual known as "the Claimant" (pictured) to be the missing heir to the Tichborne baronetcy and fortune. The real Roger Tichborne disappeared after a shipwreck in 1854; later, rumours surfaced that he had survived and made his way to Australia. In 1866 a butcher called Thomas Castro from Wagga Wagga came forward claiming to be Roger Tichborne; he travelled to England where, despite his unrefined manners and bearing, he was accepted by Lady Tichborne as her son. Although other family members were unconvinced, the Claimant gained considerable public support. However, by 1871 evidence suggested that Castro was actually Arthur Orton, a butcher's son from Wapping in London, who had gone to sea as a boy. A civil case ended with charges of perjury against him, and in 1874 a criminal court jury decided that he was indeed Orton. He was sentenced to 14 years imprisonment. He was released in 1884; in 1895 he confessed to being Orton, only to recant immediately. He died destitute in 1898. While most commentators accept that the Claimant was Orton, for some a slight possibility exists that, after all, he was Roger Tichborne. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Great case, congrats to another, right after Sacre! Did you see the talk? I reverted once, it's back. I hate reverting, but then see this history beginning 23 April, thinking about efficient use of time and the interest of the main author, - well, the article title mentions weeping and wailing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Notification

Hello, Brianboulton. You have new messages at Ian Rose's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tichborne case, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Court of Common Pleas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

Ferrier

I looked at Kathleen Ferrier again and saw a red marking in a ref, you can probably find more easily than I could what that is about. "My" Mass in B minor structure appeared in DYK today as a surprise before it was ready ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting the red message. This arose from an overelaborate attempt to highlight errors in reference templates, which resulted in warning messages such as this being deposited even when there was no error. There were complaints about this some weeks ago, and I think the issue has been resolved now. As to your DYK surprise, I couldn't find it. I don't know how that system works, but maybe you could engineer an entry: "Did you know that a DYK entry about Bach's B minor Mass was featured before it was ready and had to be withdrawn". Brianboulton (talk) 13:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Understand Ferrier, thanks. - The Mass: it was on DYK overnight, quirky (!), probably quickly inserted for something else withdrawn, - I had no idea, would have added if I had known. Now I will have to go for GA once I added ;) - It's still linked on top of my user and talk, - we will sing it this year, as Messiah in 2011, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Source review in Kahaani FAC

Thanks a lot for doing the source review. And I apologize for the lapses, I should have checked those stringently. Please have a look now; I believe all the points are addressed. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Rite of Spring may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

This bot is a stranger to me. Furthermore, I haven't a clue what it's going on about - it seems to think there's an unpaired bracket somewhere, but I can't find it. Brianboulton (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ha ha! Found it! Brianboulton (talk) 17:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fay Compton may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Harold Davidson may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Jane Joseph

No problem. I'll pay a visit either tonight, or more likely tomorrow. Life is a little hectic at the moment, so I'm going quite slowly. I'm still hammering away at good old Gubby (who I am heartily sick of) but he is some way away from FAC. Next up for PR/FAC is Archie MacLaren. I just need to find a few more bits and pieces, and to cut him down from his (surprise surprise) ridiculous length. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:57, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Cricket poser

I don't know whether it's worse that you noticed this, or that I matched it at the second attempt! Second Test, Australia v England 1911-12: England team: Hobbs, Rhodes, Hearne, Gunn, Mead, Foster, Douglas, Woolley, Smith, Barnes, Hitch. This matches your eight. I suspect there is a nine there somewhere. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Well I never. I will resist the temptation to search through the records of the 900-odd Tests that England have played, but I'll keep a watchful eye on the current selectors' policies. For example, if they drop Compton and decide to recall Strauss.... (oh, shut up) Brianboulton (talk) 17:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Davidson preaching 1932.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Davidson preaching 1932.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:05, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Some enchanted something or other

Proceeding at our usual considered pace, Ssilvers and I have sent South Pacific (musical) off to tryouts in the sticks at peer review. Hopefully, the reaction when it gets to FAC (assuming it makes it past New Haven) will not have us singing "This Nearly Was Mine". Comments very welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll be pleased to do this. I don't know it well, but I've often wondered whether people actually stay on for Act II, since all the good songs are in Act I. Brianboulton (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Presumably with theatre prices where they are, people stay to get their money's worth. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:22, 28 May 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.

Leon Quartermaine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Saint Joan
The Rite of Spring (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Rite

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:10, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Spring police?

Hello Brian. I noticed that in this edit] you removed reference to “the management”. I wonder did you mean to do this? Perhaps their participation can be assumed without being explicitly stated? Are all of the claims made in this paragraph covered by Kelly pp 292-94? I was also wondering why you thought the footnote regarding Prof Buch’s diligent research was unnecessary. At least he has established a fact, even if it is rather inconclusive? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:47, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I can confirm that all the information in this paragraph is covered in the Kelly citation. The section dealing with the police reads as follows:

Diaghilev or Astruc (reports vary) ordered the house lights turned on, perhaps between scenes. Grigoriev says this was so that the police could arrest or eject trouble-makers. Carl Van Vechten says that 'some forty of the protesters were forced out of the theatre, but that did not quell the disturbance'; was it the police that did the ejecting, or the crowd? Gregoriev, of course, was normally backstage, so the presence of the police in the house must have been a rumor (or a wish).

I think that, given the uncertainty of a police presence, the text paraphrases this information appropriately; there is no specific mention in the source of the management doing any ejecting, so I have left this open. As to the footnote, that seemed rather a red herring; if, as seems likely, the police were not involved, there would of course be no police records relating to the event. If you wish to restore the footnote you can of course do so, but I am inclined to think it adds little, except to foster the uncorroborated stories about police involvement. Brianboulton (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks for your detailed reply. Prof Buch made it clear that it was a whole section of reports that were missing - not just an absence of reports for this incident. And that this was unusual, i.e. something had been deliberately removed, for whatever reason. But I'm not too bothered. You're right, it doesn't add very much. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

The Rite of Spring again

Hi Brian, as someone who has commented in the past on whether The Rite of Spring article should have an infobox or not, I wanted to let you know that the discussion has been reopened on the article's talk page. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I had noted the discussion and have expressed a view on the matter. Brianboulton (talk) 17:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I wanted to give everyone who commented on it before the exact same notice. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

Fools rush in...

I'm fanatical about not having red links in my FAs, which usually means I have to write a stub about a flea, moss or protozoan. However, I've just started working up Garden Warbler, and the curse of Messiaen means that I've had to create La fauvette des jardins. This is some way outside my comfort zone, and I've basically just butchered an existing Messiaen page. I'd be grateful if you or one of your stalkers could fix the worse of whatever I've done to this piece. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi, Jim. I don't think you have done any harm to Messiaen. The work is a kind of follow-up to a series of piano pieces that he wrote in the 1950s, called the "Catalogue of Birds", or "Catalogue d'oiseaux" as he would have it. There's a short article about the pieces here. I have never found these works agreeable, but I'm afraid that goes for Messiaen's music generally. Brianboulton (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Archive 60←Archive 63Archive 64Archive 65
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brianboulton/Archive_65&oldid=1141614733"