User talk:Tim riley/Archive4

January 2013

Happy New Year

File:Happy New Year 2013.jpg		Have an enjoyable New Year!
		Hello Tim riley: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2013}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Neville

Ready for peer review? If you're happy, I'll nominate. Brianboulton (talk) 10:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Quite ready. Looking forward to it. Tim Riley (talk) 10:31, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Duly nominated. We might let a few potential reviewers know, to generate some interest. Brianboulton (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I feel almost guilty at trying to press-gang our American colleagues - but almost is not quite. I'll seek recruits for the posse. Tim Riley (talk) 18:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Royal Opera House

Hello, Tim riley. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Andrew Gray (talk) 16:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Cardus invite

A man after my own heart who indulged himself "...through the worlds of reading and of music hall and pantomime." Although certainly not in expert in this field (ouch!), I will endeavour to offer some comments in what promises to be a very interesting article. -- Cassianto^Talk 22:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

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

—Cliftonian (talk) 04:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Although I've lived in Yorkshire since 1970 the [Manchester] Guardian has been my constant companion for even longer (today's has just arrived from Whip-Ma-Whop-Ma-Gate) and I can dimly recall articles in it by Cardus which, I'm sorry to say, were rather disappointing and gave me the impression that he was in his dotage (ah, the arrogance of youth). Nevertheless, I'll give the article a good read and may indulge in picking a few nits here and there. Happy New Year! --GuillaumeTell 10:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

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.

Nora Nicholson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Leamington and You Never Can Tell

Margot Boyd (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Waiting in the Wings

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 January 2013 (UTC)

Le Mez

Hello Tim, just a quick note to let you know of the recent FAC of the character actor John Le Mesurier which I have co-nominated along with Schrodinger's cat is alive and Dr. Blofeld. Confident it meets all featured article criteria and should the subject matter interest you enough, we would welcome any comments or criticisms that you may have to offer. -- Cassianto^Talk 21:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Royal portraits

Hi Tim, I started an article on the Portrait of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and Category:Portraits of the British Royal Family, realizing our coverage of Royal portraits is extremely poor. I was wondering if you or Brian were knowledgeable or you know somebody knowledgeable who could create a list of missing notable royal portraits. I'm keen to improve coverage in this area.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ceoil and Johnbod are both art contributors at FA and both seem excellent. Incidentally, DrKiernan and Ealdgyth are both known for their royal and history contributions and are equally as good. -- Cassianto^Talk 20:30, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Cardus PR

I've added a few penceworth to the comments. I can't see anything still outstanding, and I doubt there will be further comments. So what do you say to an FAC nomination on, say, Sunday? Incidentally, I note that an IP has added date format and BritEng templates. I'm not sure these are necessary; more templates can mean longer loading times, or so I am told. Brianboulton (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I didn't know about templates and slow loading. By all means blitz if you prefer. As to FAC, happy for you to nominate tomorrow, but I shall be in the Lakes from 17th to 24th (approx), with broadband access but of course no Cardus books to hand. More work for you, but then you've done most of the work on the article thus far, so plus ça change. Tim riley (talk) 09:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I think I'll get rid of the templates. The dates work out rather well, as I will have limited online time between 14th and 17th but will be fine thereafter, so you may have to be in the chair until your departure for the presumably wintry, Sibelian lakes. I'll do the nom tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I have nominated Cardus at FAC. You will be more or less in charge until 17th, as mentioned above, though I will check in daily. Brianboulton (talk) 20:28, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Right ho! Meanwhile best wishes in your absence (and thereafter, natch) Tim riley (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Back now to more or less full duty. Enjoy the frozen lakes. Brianboulton (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Tim, I guess you're probably away now, but there are a couple of points in Gerda's list that I was hoping you would deal with:

• Infobox: she suggests adding details of the main papers he worked for, and "a few significant books". I would say it's OK to add The Manchester Guardian and perhaps the Sydney Morning Herald, but not the books; it would be hard to choose what titles were especially "significant", and a short list might anyway distort the range and nature of Cardus's writings.
• She is querying why you used The Marriage of Figaro (English title) and Der Rosenkavalier (German title). The reason I'd give is that it is by these titles that the operas are best known in England.
  • I agree with you in re the MG (but perhaps not the Herald) and excluding the books. As to the operas I have followed WP article titles. For my part I'd prefer "Le Nozze di Figaro", but WP has its own style. Tim riley (talk) 01:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

If you are able to address these from your Cumbrian fastness, I'd be glad if you would do so. Otherwise, I'll deal with them myself along the above lines, but I'd really prefer to have your opinion first. Brianboulton (talk) 19:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Just arrived. Will have much pleasure in looking at tomorrow. Tim riley (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on another FA, ready for the birthday! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A. H. Fox Strangways, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wellington College (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) 11:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Wagner FAC

Hi Tim, you may already have been planning to review this but thought I'd ping you anyway (as I have Brian); in addition to overall comments, I'd value a spotcheck from you if you can manage it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Great to see ENO scheduled for TFA 1 Feb! - Will we meet on Wagner? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm away from home at the moment, but will definitely be wading in chez Wagner when I get back at the weekend. Tim riley (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

G'day again, Tim, let me know (here is fine) if you can get on to review/spotcheck shortly -- prefer to save my run-through till after that but as it's the second-oldest nom right now I'd like to move on it as soon as possible... :-) Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I am wading slowly, reached Bayreuth today, "höchste Lust" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I got back to London yesterday. I'll order the necessary books at the British Library today and go in on Wednesday to do the spot check review. Tim riley (talk) 09:57, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

ENO

On the subject of English National Opera, tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=en:English_National_Opera is reporting a lot of deadlinks, and I thought I'd try to fix them. Some might just be temporary problems (The Independent?) but the Gramophone ones seem to be dead permanently since they've switched to a new fee-based archive and retired their previous archive. A search for a few sample ones using the "Wayback Machine" brings no joy. Any thoughts? Bencherlite^Talk 12:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

When that happens to me, and there was a print edition, usually I have enough information to make it a print reference.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I wondered about that possibility, but also wondered whether Tim had a subscription to the new archive and could update the links that way (even though we'd have to add {{subscription}} to the links. Bencherlite^Talk 23:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

A plague on the publishers of the Gramophone! I haven't taken out a subscription to the new non-free archive, and I'll go through this article, and Heaven knows how many others, removing the dead urls. Tim riley (talk) 09:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the plague sentiment, but removing all links may not be helpful if those links work for subscribers. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

They don't lead to a log-on screen, an invitation to subscribe to the archive or anything similar. They're just dead pages e.g. this after they "retired" the old archive in favour of a fee-based one. Bencherlite^Talk 10:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry - I ought to have made that clear, above. Tim riley (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Nora Nicholson

Tim, you beat me to it. @#$%&[:)]. I wanted to do Nora Nicholson, at least start it anyway. I procrastinated way too long. My hats off to you and some of the others, who have contributed already, like SsSilvers, I recognize his name. She was a wonderful character actress, overdue for a wiki. I might have a citation or two the article can use. Once again great article, a job well done. All my best! Koplimek (talk) 14:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

The King and I

Just wanted to let you know I checked that reference to the Hammerstein book and it is all correct.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I thought that would be so, but worth asking, withal. Tim riley (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

We should have it at FAC by the weekend. Congrats on Cardus.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Main page appearance: English National Opera

This is a note to let the main editors of English National Opera know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on February 1, 2013. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 1, 2013. 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 his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

English National Opera (ENO) is an opera company based in London, resident at the London Coliseum (pictured). Its productions are sung in English. The company's origins were in the late 19th century, when the philanthropist Emma Cons, later assisted by her niece Lilian Baylis, presented theatrical and operatic performances at the Old Vic in a rough area of London for the benefit of local people. Baylis acquired and rebuilt Sadler's Wells theatre in north London, which was better suited to opera than the Old Vic. The opera company grew there into a permanent ensemble in the 1930s and, after expansion required a move to the Coliseum in 1968, adopted its present name in 1974. Conductors associated with the company include Colin Davis, Reginald Goodall, Charles Mackerras, Mark Elder and Edward Gardner. ENO is known for its emphasis on the dramatic aspect of opera, with productions, sometimes controversial, by directors including David Pountney, Jonathan Miller, Nicholas Hytner, Phyllida Lloyd and Calixto Bieito. In addition to the core operatic repertoire, ENO has presented a wide range of works, from early operas by Monteverdi to new commissions, operetta and Broadway shows. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

February 2013

Date

Great and inviting! - Do you know when The Flying Dutchman (opera) was first staged, in English that is? Perhaps also go over that article? I think to link "love" is overlinking, for example, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Ken Widmerpool

Best of luck with ENO above; my TFAs usually end in fights, often about infoboxes, but I'll look forward to seeing this one on the main page (I noted the mention of Claudio in the blurb). If in the cold wastes of the north you have a moment to spare, I'd be pleased if you would cast an eye over Mr Widmerpool. This has been months in the coming; I had to read all 12 of Powell's volumes (approx 3000 pages), but it was worth it (well, almost). Or you may wish to save comments for your return to civilisation; it will be at PR for a couple of weeks at least. What is your next project? Arguments over infoboxes have rather drained my enthusiasm for musical articles, so after I'm done with Ken I will probably start something completely different; George Lansbury has always been a hero of mine. But if you have a musical subject in mind. I'll always be prepared to help. Brianboulton (talk) 15:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I can conscientiously say that ENO's Coronation of Popeye was without exception or rival the most boring evening I have spent in the opera house during nearly fifty years of opera-going, but speaking of bores, if any humourless, self-righteous bully (if, per impossibile, we had such people in the WP community) were to claim the divine right of inserting an infobox for the ENO article I should not mind too much, as because of the existing layout, an infobox, though useless to the reader, would not elbow useful text out of the way in this particular article. As to British politicos, though I am a dyed-in-the wool woolly liberal repelled by Toryism, somehow the Tory characters seem more interesting than my lot or their Labour equivalents. Well, whom would you sooner sit next to at dinner, Gladstone or Disraeli? Still, Lansbury was very good as Mrs Lovett in Sweeney Todd (though I saw Sheila Hancock in the part) or have I got muddled here? Glad to look in at Widmerpool once back at Ca' Riley. He is a magnificent creation, though to my mind pointing up the Dickens/Waugh/Powell problem of boring ciphers as central characters with a gallery of cherishable grotesques like KW, Micawber, Ritchie-Hook, cavorting in orbit round them. Tim riley (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Disraeli. Every single time. I'd send my worst enemy to sit with Gladstone. I have Disraeli on my long-term list but that's a considerable project and I'd really have to read up on that era before even trying it. Also, The King and I is at FAC, please feel free to leave comments.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I have a weakness for left-wing firebrands. That's why, when reading A Buyer's Market I, like Jenkins and Widmerpool before me, fell briefly in love with the young Gypsy Jones. I was sad that her role in the following novels was so marginal, and appalled by the postwar description of her, aged forty: "...short, wiry, her head tied up in a red handkerchief, somehow calling to mind Soviet posters celebrating the Five Year Plan. Too stocky and irritable in appearance, in fact, to figure in pictorial propaganda". Ah, me, I knew someone just like that, for my sins (but that was in another country; and besides, the wench is dead). Brianboulton (talk) 19:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hah! These scandalous heterosexual goings on have no place in diesen heil'gen Hallen. Is nothing sacred? Tim riley (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Widmerpool has engineered his way on to the FAC page and would be grateful for any attention you might give him.

On a more general issue, I have been avoiding music articles recently, and my current project George Lansbury is political, but thereafter I am considering a cautious return to the musical sphere. I enjoyed doing Warlock, and our joint effort on Delius. I've been looking at RVW and Holst; the former doesn't really grab me, but the latter might. The article is quite well developed, but needs a lot of polishing. Would you be at all interested, say about mid-March, in giving this a seeing-to? Brianboulton (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Delighted. I know very little about GH but will enjoy reading him up. Tim riley (talk) 14:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas German Reed, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gilbert à Beckett (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) 12:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

H. C. McNeile

Hi Tim, I know you are incredibly busy on a number of things—all in subjects both worthy and worthwhile—but is there a chance you would have an opportunity to go down market and comment on the creator of an unspeakable public school bully with odious political views? Do not worry if you're overburdened with your other commitments or really can't stomach the subject—all entirely understandable. Many thanks! - SchroCat (talk) 14:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

David Sheppard

Hi Tim, I've had a bit of a play around in the unholy territory of the infobox and come up with the abomination that is this. To quote Spinoza: "what an utter pain in **** that is! Whoever designed it should be taken out and horse-whipped to Blackfriars and back again". There must be a better way of doing it than this, but I'm not sure what it is, I'm afraid. (By the way, I may be misktaken on the Spinoza attribution—I'm afraid I don't have the sources to hand). All the best - SchroCat (talk) 15:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

All done. It's not perfect, but it's better than before. As they are together, it also stands more chance of someone coming along to improve it further and clear up the formatting. All the best - SchroCat (talk) 11:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Mother India/archive1

Hi Tim, can you give Mother India a read and give some feedback?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Tim riley (talk) 17:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

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.

H. C. Robbins Landon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tarn

Rafael Kubelík (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to London Symphony

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

H. C. McNeile

Many thanks for your time and thoughts on the McNeile peer review. The article has now progressed to FAC for consideration. Thanks again. — SchroCat (talk) 03:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Gramophone

Hi Tim, some time ago, you mentioned the links to the Gramophone going dead. What do we do in such cases? I just noticed (BWV 159) that arkivmusic, for example, changed their display of Gramophone articles to just the first lines, without the name of the author. So a link is still working, but not showing the essential information, which WAS THERE before. How to show? A comment in the cite template perhaps? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Greetings, Gerda! I think it is safest to strip the dead URLs from Gramophone citations and leave the citations as they would have been if they had originally referred to the print edition, i.e. author, article title, month and year, and page number. I did this in haste when the ENO article was scheduled for TFA, and I suppose (heigh ho!) I ought to do the same to all articles in which I have put links to the now-defunct Gramophone site. Tim riley (talk) 19:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

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.

A Cuckoo in the Nest (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mark Daly

Ethel Coleridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Devonshire

Rookery Nook (play) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Daniel Massey

Thark (play) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rookery Nook

When We Are Married (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Richard Warner

Winifred Shotter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Redhill

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Mother India

Most grateful, thankyou!! Well, I like old movies, and Mother India is considered one of the most important Indian films of all time. I created the lists of Indians films back in about 2007, I used to edit films almost entirely for a while back then.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Indians would think you were mad for considering Mother India to be obscure!! A lot of them revere it as a Holy Grail of Indian culture for what it stands for in the aftermath of Indian independence! I agree though that to us Brits old Asian movies, Indian or Indonesian or whatever appear as obscure topics to us, which is why its most impressive when they reach GA or FA quality!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

• It appears the good doctor is riding a high after Darah dan Doa reached GA (and Terang Boelan reached FA). Very much glad to see you giving another review... you'll probably be able to help a bit more with the music related bits than I did. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally Kareena Kapoor which I have heavily contributed to is at FAC now. Any input at the FAC would be appreciated although I see Chopra has beaten you both to it and she's prettier than Kareena.... I think I'd like to see the numeric dates formatted properly, would you agree?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Precious again

Royal opera
Thank you for the London opera, another great article with dedication to details about the people behind an institution, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:28, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the twentieth recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. I miss the photographer, again, and put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Messiah: it's now nominated, - could you please fix the link to Gramophone, as in ENO? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:31, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Hello sir, we would like your suggestions on the fac. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Priyanka Chopra/archive1. Please , review it and represent your thoughts. Thank You.Prashant  ✉  18:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The Flashman Papers

Many thanks for your recent comments atPR for The Flashman Papers. The article is now at FLC, should you wish to view or comment further. Thanks again. - SchroCat (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Request...

I noticed at the Flashman PR that you have access to the TLS archive... One of my vaguer plans, that will probably never come to anything, is to do something with George Smiley or Le Carre's "Karla trilogy". I've got anything from the Times, Guardian, etc, but wondered if there was anything in the TLS? If you could have a check for me, I would be very grateful! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if I could add to your burden, Tim, for anything from the TLS about Flashman...? Many thanks! - SchroCat (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Many, many thanks Tim. All very useful stuff and certainly useful for the character article. Thanks again. - SchroCat (talk) 14:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you kindly; very useful stuff and might actually inspire me to write on something other than cricket. (Or maybe not...) You are a scholar and a gentleman! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Richard Goolden

Just to add (after my clumsy attempt to reply to yours about Walton) I'm delighted to see your addition to this article. All very best, Alfietucker (talk) 16:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Messiah

Hi, Tim. As you probably know, the article is the subject of a TFA request, here. Ref 137 is giving a dead link message (the page evidently no longer exists). Is there an alternative source, or should the text on Willcocks's recording simply be cut? I have dealt with the dead Gramophone links by adding {{subscription}} indicators, not quite as you dealt with the problem at ENO, but this way makes it clear the archive still exists. Brianboulton (talk) 13:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I've added a paper ref: do you think that will do? If not, then by all means wield the blue pencil. Tim riley (talk) 14:38, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

This looks fine. On another matter: do you think we should go ahead with a TFA request for Neville Cardus on 3 April? Another article, also a 125th birthday anniversary, has requested the date so there's competition. Maybe we'd be greedy to put up another, 11 days after Messiah? Brianboulton (talk) 23:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

(watching) I don't think that's being greedy, just showing an original mind, - I would support! At least propose, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

New bling

The Awesome Farces Award

I award you this "Awesome Farces" award in recognition of your serious achievements made, while drawing dirty looks from the librarians at the British Library, as you guffawed your way through the scripts of the Aldwych farces. This award also reflects your various other ongoing efforts to improve articles about the theatre in the English-speaking world, including plays, theatre companies, actors, producers, writers and critics. You are not merely a prolific contributor, but a skilled researcher and a stylish writer. Your contributions can only be described as "awesome", and that's no farce! -- Ssilvers (talk) 10:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Here, Here! -- Cassianto^Talk 10:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

LOL, I'd love to see Tim "drawing dirty looks from the librarians at the British Library, as you guffawed your way through the scripts of the Aldwych farces" LOL!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

This is all very kind. I'll feel a bit more justified in nailing this colour to my mast once I have written articles on the last three of the Aldwych series and overhauled the Aldwych farce article in the light of my archival rummaging. I wish to deny emphatically that I guffawed in the reading room of the British Library; whether my unfortunate neighbours found my stifled splutters and strangulated snorts any better than guffaws is not for me to say. Tim riley (talk) 14:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

In that case, you may consider this award to be granted conditionally and held in the protection of Colonel Cassianto until you deliver the last three of the eleven and expand the main Aldwych farce articles. That should meet the case, I think? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:02, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Ahem! Not three but four new articles now needed, as I have discovered another 1930 Aldwych farce that had escaped the attention of the Colonel, your good self and your obedient servant. Tim riley (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, but that would explain a good many things. What can I say, but Marry the Girl! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Blast, I thought we had caught them all! As colonel, I can't promise I won't go AWOL with your medal ;) -- Cassianto^Talk 22:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors

Hi Tim. Can you do me a favour and give this a read. I think it has FA potential. What do you think? Can you open a peer review on it?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, no worries. thanks.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Useful stats?

Is this info of any use or interest to you? It updates every time you press the "save" key. Brianboulton (talk) 17:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for this. I'll have a play, though I fear a preliminary tinkering suggests that it's a bit beyond my meagre technical abilities. Tim riley (talk) 20:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

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.

Frederick Leister (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lyceum Theatre

Hilda Trevelyan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hackney

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Gramophone magazine public service announcement

Reminder re: now-defunct Gramophone website: "strip the dead URLs from Gramophone citations and leave the citations as they would have been if they had originally referred to the print edition, i.e. author, article title, month and year, and page number..." - Tim riley (talk) 2:47 pm, 9 February 2013, Saturday (20 days ago) (UTC−5)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mother India/archive1

Thanks for participating in the PR (Wikipedia:Peer review/Mother India/archive1). Mother India is now at FAC.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 08:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Orthography, re:Fifty-Fifty

On behalf of this humble Wikignome, you're welcome for the spelling edit. Thanks for creating the article in the first place and growing Wikipedia. ejly (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Cardus

I nominated Neville Cardus for TFA on 3 April, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Mr Marple

If you're in a good mood you might like to cast your reviewer's eye over the above, my first venture into the world of political biography. Perhaps the surname may tempt a few curious readers to find out what Angela's grandad did for a living. I can but hope. Brianboulton (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I shall do so with the greatest pleasure. More within 48 hours. Tim riley (talk) 18:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

10 Downing Street

I think it would be best to close it for now. I'm working on it but it will take a while. I'll renominate when I'm ready - thanks for your help. Cloudbound (talk) 20:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your very constructive review of the Number 10 Downing Street article. For the last two days I have been editing it to address as best I can most of your comments and recommendations. I am making very good progress. I don't know the Wikipedia rules about reviews but hopefully you will be able to re-open the review soon.Sir Cloudesley Shovel II (talk) 23:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Delius

Thank you Tim riley for your pointing out. Now I understand my fault. Yet, do you think at least two of them (Isleworth and Napoleonic Wars) are helpful? If you agree with me, I would like to resume putting links which are really beneficial for readers. Thank you--Ponruy (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm really glad to have a message from you. It was totally my fault and I should have been more careful to edit an article. Thank you for your kind consideration.--Ponruy (talk) 16:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I have completed translation of Charles Villiers Stanford (in which I found you also made great contribution!) and Felix Mendelssohn and am working on Delius. Simultaneously, Japanese article on Piano Concerto (Delius) is under construction based on booklet by Hyperion and IMSLP. Do you think it is worth back-translating into English? For cf., my contributions for musical pieces include Piano Concerto (Yashiro) and Piano Concerto No.4 (Scharwenka) JP ver.--Ponruy (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Tim riley! Thank you so much for your revising of Piano Concerto (Yashiro). Now it is greatly improved. I'm still working on Delius and have translated related articles such as Julius Buths and Hans Haym. Today, I uploaded Piano Concerto (Delius). When you have time, please pay a brief visit to that article. I hope you will enjoy it.--Ponruy (talk) 14:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for giving intensive revision on Piano Concerto (Delius). I should learn much from your kind corrections. Now I feel sorry, as I made you review my English writing. It is necessary for me to polish writing skills in order not to bother you.--Ponruy (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I would like to express my sincere gratitude for your giving me kind words. By making small contributions (and occasionally creating new articles) I will answer for your warmest regards. (I agree. The concerto is somehow capricious in form! In fact, I haven't heard many of compositions by Delius, so I started to listen them in this opportunity. Now I'm really fond of them!)--Ponruy (talk) 05:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Flying Eagle cent

If you have a moment and care to put your 2p in, Flying Eagle cent is somewhat languishing at FAC. I think you'd prefer it to my other FAC :) Many thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

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.

A Bit of a Test (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to The Argus and The Advertiser

Mary Brough (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tons of Money

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Theodora Cormontan

I have agreed to peer-review this article about a Norwegian composer. There's some stuff on my talkpage. I've never heard of her, and can find no mention in any of the English-language music reference books. Internet searches don't reveal much, either. Do you think there's anything in the BL that would throw any light? Maybe you'd be prepared to join in the review, if only to encourage another classical music editor ? Brianboulton (talk)

Infoboxes:

I've archived the debate [1]. Nothing more productive was going to come, and the majority approved the motion that info boxes are not always necessary. Seems a good compromise.  Giano  19:19, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

• PS: I have never been banned!

Norman Hackforth?

Sorting through some images on Commons tonight I came across one of Noël Coward performing in Sri Lanka in 1944, and while adding it to the article discovered that we have an entry for his accompanist - Norman Hackforth. Unfortunately, the article turns out to be entirely a lift from his Independent obituary, and so I've had to hack it back to a couple of sentences.

I am guessing his post-war radio work (he was "the mystery voice" of Twenty Questions) makes him notable enough for an article, but I'm not sure how significant his work with Coward actually was - the obituary suggests he was influential, but until I added the photograph he wasn't mentioned at all in the main article!

As you wrote much of the Coward article, and you're more up on such things than I, could you have a quick glance at it? Many thanks, Andrew Gray (talk) 22:27, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. I enjoyed that. The article as I've left it is no work of art, but 'twill suffice, I think. Tim riley (talk) 11:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Amazing - many thanks! Andrew Gray (talk) 12:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Messiah TFA

In advance of next Saturday's TFA I've been looking at the Messiah article. I've fixed a few dead links, removed drive-by uncited text and made other minor changes; otherwise the article looks fit to go. One little problem I can't solve: it may be something to do with my own browser, and therefore not a problem to anyone else, but please take a look at the second item in the Sources section. My computer insists on representing the CD number as a phone number, complete with an icon and a hover message saying "Call this phone number in United Kingdom with Skype". Does this happen with yours? Brianboulton (talk) 23:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I've just tried with Internet Exploder 9 and Firefox 19.0.2 (my only two browsers) and the details pop up as good as gold. How it is that Bad Sir Brian comes by a dubious phone number I (and, let us hope, Lady Boulton) refrain from enquiring. Resident at Riley Towers, but out just now, is a Google chrome user, whom I shall get to check the link tomorrow. Tim riley (talk) 23:34, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Internet Exploder??? Brianboulton (talk) 00:22, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Of course! Bill Gates made a bomb with it, you know. Tim riley (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Get rid of, or tame, a Skype add-on (Click-to-Call) in your browser; see e.g. http://community.skype.com/t5/Windows-desktop-client/All-phone-numbers-in-internet-browsers-appear-in-skype-format/td-p/328030 . -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Lansbury et al

First, I've nominated Lansbury at FAC if you care to check it out. Second, some while back I indicated that my return to music article writing might be via Gustav Holst, and I suggested we could combine forces for this. Are you still up for that? I've done a bit of source researching (see here) and you may have some suggestions. Now that I have JSTOR access I am a little more independent than I used to be! Brianboulton (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I am. Coincidentally I sent off the other day for Imogen's study of Gustav. Are you happy to follow the modus operandi we adopted for Delius with you taking the lead on the music and me concentrating on the biography? Tim riley (talk) 09:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Generally, yes, though we will need to be a bit flexible (as we were with Delius), or you'll end up doing 75% of the work. Brianboulton (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

For a moment I got excited and thought this was about Angela Lansbury. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Desist! Or tibia, fibia, Libya and a shepherd's pie peppered with actual shepherd on top. Tim riley (talk) 19:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Jeffrey-skitch-pinafore.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jeffrey-skitch-pinafore.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• You'll probably have to forward his letter of permission to the OTRS team at WP:OTRS, particularly permissions-commons@wikimedia.org  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tim riley. You have new messages at Stefan2's talk page.
Message added 00:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stefan2 (talk) 00:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

George Harrison

Hi, Tim. Since you commented at the original FAC for George Harrison, I wonder if you wouldn't mind giving it a second look for the current FAC when you get a chance. As always, any input you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 07:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• Ping. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 05:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Lyric(s)

You are completely correct--but my point was made because a "lyric" poem, here set to music, should still be referred to as a "lyric." Just a personal bias, perhaps, but a lyric is a lyric, whether musically used or not. Do as you will; I tilt at windmills regularly. Thanks for all your good work. 99.93.246.124 (talk) 02:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Neville Cardus

This is a note to let the main editors of Neville Cardus know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 2, 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 2, 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:

Neville Cardus (1888–1975) was an English writer and critic. He became cricket correspondent of The Manchester Guardian in 1919, and its chief music critic in 1927, holding both posts until 1940. His contributions to these two distinct fields in the years before the Second World War established his reputation as one of the foremost critics of his generation. He considered music criticism as his principal vocation. Without any formal musical training, he was initially influenced by Samuel Langford and Ernest Newman, but developed his own individual style of criticism—subjective, romantic and personal, in contrast to the objective analysis practised by Newman. Cardus's opinions and judgments were often forthright and unsparing, which sometimes caused friction with leading performers. Nevertheless his personal charm and gregarious manner enabled him to form lasting friendships in the cricketing and musical worlds, with among others Newman, Thomas Beecham and Donald Bradman. Cardus spent the Second World War years in Australia, where he wrote for The Sydney Morning Herald and gave regular radio talks. In his last years he became an inspirational figure to aspiring young writers. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Music for a Time of War

Thank you for your kind words. I have just a few more sources to incorporate into the article and then I will be attempting to promote to FA status. Please feel free to keep an eye on the article, if interested, and to provide feedback during the review. --Another Believer _(Talk) 14:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

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)

Fatimid architecture

Helloelloello! I was wondering if you could review this one. I feel it is adequate for a GA. It has been very well-researched. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Can you reserve the review for a later date then?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 09:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hehe, and who else is likely to be an expert on here in Fatimid architecture? ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Nearly 10 days...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Points should have been addressed by now! Only one needs addressing, can you sort out the dashes? ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Nice one. If nobody has claimed your article by Monday I'll claim it, promise. It's a tough job reviewing your articles for GA as I'll probably end up not being picky enough!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Ashton event

Hope you're enjoying the long weekend! The sun even seems to have emerged for it, here in the wild fenlands. As promised, a first attempt at the Ashton event outline - thoughts? Andrew Gray (talk) 22:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - tidied. A general framework for new articles, or a couple of reference examples, would be great; possibly also some notes on when we should have an article on his specific version vs. notes in the article on the overall work.

Can I leave it in your capable hands to spread the word about it (you know who to approach better than I do!) or would you like me to send some notices out to various wikiprojects etc? Andrew Gray (talk) 00:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and well done for Enigma. Perhaps great minds think alike, though luckily not too much alike or there would be too many virgins and hardly any variations. I also had Birthday Offering on my list, but will leave it in case it appeals to someone at the Opera House event. Maybe someone will have a chance to improve on some of my other Ashton efforts. Wise Virgins needs clarification on the full number of movements (8 or 9) and the provenance of each piece. Enigma Variations is a good ballet and probably the only place one ever hears the original end. I wonder if Boult ever conducted the ballet? I noted that watching a recent DVD of an archive film (1950s) of Coppelia there was some sort of junior Royal Ballet principal called Rudolf Offenbach. I wonder if he is any relation? Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 15:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for a very interesting link, which I did not know about, but will try to remember to use. I did spot one oddity: Gabriel Bacquier is entered giving just one performance per opera in various years in the 60s - maybe they only give first nights for some revivals. But many thanks. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 15:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Holst

A couple of things from your draft:

• Who did RVW mean by "Vittoria"? Could this be Tomas Luis de Victoria?
• You have GH working on Savriti during the war. The impression given is that he was composing it; in fact he finished it in 1908. Any work he did in 1916 would have been polishing in preparation for the 1916 amateur performance. Brianboulton (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

• I am working on Holst, but I am waiting for Abebooks to deliver Dickinson's book. In the meantime - I note you popped into Jane Cobden; it's now at PR if you think it worthy of any further comment. Brianboulton (talk) 15:26, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

• Update: I now have the Dickinson book. Whether worth the wait remains to be seen. Amid numerous distractions I have been busy on Holst in my sandboxes, though the pace is somewhat funereal; it should pick up a bit, now. In the meantime, might it be an idea to shift your stuff on to the article page, stick an underconstruction banner in, and work on it there? We need to get some credits in the article history. Brianboulton (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• Further update: I have now posted the first part of the "Music" section. At 1300+ words it is rather bloated at present, and is missing some refs (which I will add shortly). Also, I haven't harmonised it with your text, so there may well be repetitions of material. I shall be editing it further, and working on the remaining subsections, over the next few days. Brianboulton (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013

Ballet editathon

I've signed up - I'll be seeing Gloriana at the ROH on the 22nd, so I'll come down to London the previous evening (I don't fancy catching early morning trains). How exactly does the editathon work? (And by the way, Editathon redirects to Hackathon!) --GuillaumeTell 11:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, but I am rarely in London at weekends, alas, and even when I am, family commitments tend to make it difficult to get to such things. I hope it goes well. As for people who might be interested, I'm not sure who to suggest who wouldn't already be in your thoughts anyway. Yours, Bencherlite^Talk 10:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Marie Lloyd peer review

Hi Tim, just a quick note to let you that 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. -- Cassianto^Talk 16:47, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

GE peer review

Greetings. Would you be willing to participate in a second peer review to prep the Gospel of the Ebionites article for FAC? Your name was recommended to me by Ian Rose. Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 21:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Not R&H, but his life was quite a drama

You probably recall Ezra Meeker, who utterly stole the show in one of my coin articles. I've done a bit of work on his article and taken it to peer review and I'd be grateful for your comments in due course. Hope all is well.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:23, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

If you are minded to do this, then I'd be grateful if you'd hold off say until late in the week … I've been in touch with an expert on Meeker who is listed in the Bibliography, twice (I hate using the real names of people in talk) and he's favoured me with two rather long emails with both suggestions and attachments ...--Wehwalt (talk) 23:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

The Edward Clark connection

Hi Tim. You said some nice things about the article I started on Edward Clark (conductor), so I thought you might be interested to know what's happened since. I became aware during my research that his son Conrad Clark lives in Melbourne, so I bit the bullet and contacted him. I live close to 3 hours drive away, but I had reason to be down there and suggested we meet up. He was more than happy to do so; we had a most engrossing 3-hour lunch during which he filled in a number of gaps in my knowledge, told me a lot about his father and mother Elisabeth Lutyens, and mentioned a whole host of famous names he'd met through them.

One little anecdote of many: whenever Igor Stravinsky came to London, the first person he always asked after and wanted to see was Edward. Vere is Clark?, he would demand.

Conrad took me back to his flat, showed my some of his amazing sculptures, showed me the first decent photo I'd ever seen of his father, and let me have a complete printed catalogue of his mother's works. I had to shame-facedly admit to him that, in a lifetime of music listening, I had yet to hear a single note of her music. That's now being attended to.

Conrad has a website ([2]) and a youtube video ([3]) but is not connected to the internet at home (he accesses emails at the local library). I took with me a printed copy of my article to give him, and asked for feedback in due course. When he got back to me, he said there was one important omission. He claims Anton Webern dedicated his orchestration of the Ricarcare from Bach's The Musical Offering to Edward Clark. I've had a good look around google, but have failed to find any confirmation of this at all. Do you have access to any sources that might shed any light on this?

Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 13:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Without your highly valued insights and edits at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George Harrison/archive2, the article would not be FA today! Thanks so much for all the encouragement! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 20:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Adrian Boult at TfA?

Hi Tim -- Bencherlite is casting round for non-date-specific suggestions for Today's Featured Article, and I thought of Adrian Boult, which I don't believe has run yet. Would you mind if I were to nominate it (or would you like to nominate it yourself), or are you holding it for an anniversary or some other reason? Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 03:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Delighted to have Sir Adrian nominated. I seldom venture into TFA noms, and will be very pleased indeed if you are so kind as to undertake the task. Tim riley (talk) 12:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Excellent! I've nominated him -- actually my first attempt at this. Looking forward to seeing it on the main page. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited BBC Symphony Orchestra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rudolf Schwarz (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) 14:37, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Jane Cobden

Sorry to be bothering you again at the ancestral shack, but this lady has crept into FAC, if you have a moment to take a look. Brianboulton (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. I don't think my aged relative met Jane (my a.r. having been 27 when Jane died) but I'll ask her in the morning. Tim riley (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description details

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

• File:Clara-Butterworth-1922.jpg
• File:Sir-john-aird.tif
• File:Miriam-licette-1920.tif

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 04:53, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Ancient Egyptian deities/archive1

Many thanks for the review. (Although I once visited the British Museum, I fear I missed your friend there; there's so much to see in the museum that I was a bit overwhelmed.) I have one small question in response to your comments. Once that's answered, I suppose I'll close the review and nominate at FAC. A. Parrot (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

It's at FAC now. A. Parrot (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Gustav Holst

I have finished drafting the Music section. I am not particularly happy with it yet; at 3300 words I think it's too long. Among other problems the "style" subsection is especially weak, and the "Indian period" disproportionately detailed. I shall be looking to reduce the whole section by around 500 words, but I'm a bit exhausted with Holst and am taking a 24-hour break from him. Incidentally, the article is now over 9000 words, with more to be added; an expanded lead, replacement of the rubbishy Commemorations section with a more worthy assessment, etc. That seems a little bloated, and I think we should look for other opportunities - duplications of information, perhaps - to reduce the text. Brianboulton (talk) 10:44, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I have just read the music section and it doesn't seem in the least bloated to me. I note with a slight pang that the bio section runs to 5184 words as opposed to 3210 for the music. I'll see if I can prune. Tim riley (talk) 11:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC) Later: nothing leaps out at me. Perhaps you'd run an executioner's eye over my biography paras and wield the snickersnee. I'll yell loudly enough if I disagree with any pruning. In particular I draw your attention below (inter alia) to topics vaguely or not vaguely overlapping, where you can prune away in the biog section if you like:

• Imogen's comment on the Wagnerianness of early GH stuff

• Omitted from the Music section

• GH's economy of musical means - in the second para of Composer and teacher.

• I don't think there is duplication here

• Practical musicianship from his experience with the trombone

• Nor here

• Eastern stuff – I too have gone on a bit - 3rd para of Composer and teacher. I've gone on about folk music too (4th para) but I don't think we really overlap in what we have said on the subject.

• Yes, I've rearranged the material - and somehow mangaed to reduce both sections!

• Beni Mora – perhaps too much on it in the biog given your coverage. Pray ponder. (It is, by the way, one of my favourite GH works, and has been since my father bought a 10-inch HMV LP in 1961 or thereabouts with Beni Mora as the B side for Flash Harry's Young Person's Guide. I still have Sargent's recordings of both, and very good they are.)

• I'd already noticed and dealt with this

• Interest in astrology: we both mention it – I in the second para of 1910s.

• It's OK I think

• The Planets: "and would not sanction performances of individual movements" – could we make that "was opposed to" rather than "would not sanction"? – see my para 3 of World War I. Boult expressed regret (clearly sincere) at cutting out two movements for the public premiere but was not to be budged.

• Tweaked as you suggest

• How to refer to the daughter: please go through my stuff and remove "Holst" from "Imogen Holst" wherever you think the surname superfluous; you have it about right in the music sections, I think, and we should be consistentish.

• Done what I can. I expect someone will bring it up again at peer review.

• The Perfect Fool: feel free to prune, or to transplant to the music section, anything I've written. For a forgotten work (ballet apart) it gets a lot of coverage between us.

• I had dealt with this already; I think it's all right now.

• "Although the ballet music that begins the opera has remained a popular concert piece…" – only in Britain and perhaps Australasia, I'd guess. [Later: and not even there, possibly: see exchange here]

• The sources support the "popular" wording, but I've modified it slightly.

• Egdon Heath – Richard Greene was a bloody fool! GH was right to think of it as his masterpiece.

• You may well be right.

• they present a formidable challenge to the most professional of singers – citation wanted, I think.

• Citation is at end of following sentence. Do we need successive identical citations?

Over to you, for consideration once you have had enough of a break from Holstiana. Tim riley (talk) 12:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

• I've only just seen these notes (best ping me, because I tend not to watch others' talk!). You will see that I have cut about 500w from "Music", but I've added a more detailed "legacy" section. I have transferred a few bits of material from the biography to the music section and, you will see, have moved some of the images about; if you object don't hesitate to say so. The current word count is 8561 of which 2702 is "music". By way of comparison the figures for Delius are 7461 and 2699, and for Elgar 9959 and 2717. So we're not far out, though I'm always in favour of pruning, when possible without detriment. And the lead will probably have 100w added to it when finally polished. I will now look at the points you raise above, and see what I can make of them (some I seem to have attended to already, e.g. Beni Mora (never heard it nor even of it, before) and The Perfect Fool. Please feel free to alter or amend anything in my music text that looks awry; meantime my snickersnee is drawn, though not rampant. Brianboulton (talk) 16:51, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• After the fixes noted above, the article has 8431 words incl. 2651 in Music. One more thing: I got rid of the £4 a year and the "Measuringworth" note. That site, with its weird methodology, is more trouble than it's worth - let's please ignore it. I am going to leave Holst alone for 48 hours, while I catch up with my reviewing duties. Then, when you're ready, we can perhaps open a peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• I have done some further fiddling, and have extended the lead slightly. As the construction phase is over now, I have removed the underconstruction banner. The wordcount now is 8451, inc. music 2590. There is no reason why polishing and trimming should not continue, but what do you say to a peer review? Brianboulton (talk) 15:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Landon Ronald, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Symphony No. 8 and Ben Davies (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) 17:32, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Rosblofnari

Hi Tim. I've created this for better organization with my usual collaborators. Can you add what articles you wanted reviewed/peer reviewed/ FAC with input from me. I forgot what article it was you wanted GA reviewed! I'd be grateful if you could alert me of the projects you're working on so I can keep tabs on everything!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Adrian Boult

This is a note to let the main editors of Adrian Boult know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 30, 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 30, 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:

Adrian Boult (1889–1983) was an English conductor, known for championing British music. His first major post was conductor of the City of Birmingham Orchestra in 1924. Appointed director of music of the British Broadcasting Corporation in 1930, he established the BBC Symphony Orchestra, which was regarded as among the best in Britain under his chief conductorship. On retirement from the BBC in 1950, he took up the position of chief conductor of the London Philharmonic Orchestra and, in what was widely called his "Indian Summer", continued to conduct it until his retirement in 1978. He gave the first performance of his friend Gustav Holst's The Planets, and introduced new works by other British composers including Bliss, Britten, Delius, Tippett, Vaughan Williams and Walton, as well as foreign composers such as Bartók, Berg, Stravinsky, Schoenberg and Webern. A modest man who disliked the limelight, he felt as comfortable in the recording studio as on the concert platform and made recordings throughout his career, many of which have remained in the catalogue for three or four decades. Prominent conductors influenced by him include Colin Davis and Vernon Handley. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Looking forward to that! Look where I found his name, looking for Matthias Eisenberg, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Good to see the bold signature on the Main page, with your great signature all over the article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

FAC request

Hi! The article Tripura is currently in FAC. I have no idea whether you have any time or any interest in the topic at all. Since the FAC has not received significant reviews/comments, I was wondering if you would be kind enough to have a look at it. I understand you may be busy, so no rush. Sorry for such an abrupt request. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Holst and UCL

The link provided by ref 57 does not seem to provide helpful information. Is there a further procedure that needs to be followed, to verify the cited info? Brianboulton (talk) 11:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I'm sorry to say. The editor who contributed this info here plainly put in a lot of work, and I have no doubt at all that the info is correct. But alas, I can't see how the citation could survive FAC; it certainly doesn't meet the standards for verifiability. I have already scouted round to try to find an adequate ref but without success. Tim riley (talk) 12:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I think Note 9 can go; it is marginal detail anyway. That leaves us with finding a ref that confirms Holst studied at UCL. Short's biography does not mention the place, nor do any of Head's "Indian" articles, or any other of my biographical sources. Do you have a source? Brianboulton (talk) 23:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Imogen 1981. Shall do the necessary. Tim riley (talk) 08:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

PS: Did you see that the Leningrad symphony is on the FAC page? (Daah, daah-di duh duh/daah, daah-di duh duh/daah, daah-di DUH DUH/Dee daah dee daah dee duh duh/Dee daah dee daah dee duh duh/dee daah, daah, di-duh duh/daah, daah-di dum dum dum dum/daah, daah, di-duh duh/dee duh duh/dee DUH DUH!) Brianboulton (talk) 16:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

By coincidence I have just been listening to Bartók's Concerto for Orchestra with its reference to the Leningrad – which I gather we are no longer supposed to take as a raspberry in Dmitri's direction, though I am not clear why. Shall look in soonest. Tim riley (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Sources are uncertain as to Bartok's intentions. Paul Griffiths (1984) is in no doubt that Bartok intended to mock. Kenneth Chalmers, writing ten years later, says the passage may mock the Leningrad symphony, but it does so only to underline the pathos and nostalgia of a semi-quoted Hungarian song from Zsigmond Vincze' 1928 operetta The Bride of Hamburg. What the **** is he talking about? Brianboulton (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Sirens

No problem. I am very fond of the piece, having sung it on a Radio 3 broadcast of choral evensong from Westminster Abbey on an RSCM course when I was a lad. I long to sing it again (or perhaps play the organ part somewhere!) Bencherlite^Talk 21:44, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Jack Hobbs

I'm being a bit cheeky here, but you have commented on cricket issues here and there, and I wondered if you fancy taking a look at the article on Mr Hobbs at PR here? It needs non-cricket-obsessive eyes, and your advice and comments are always invaluable. If you have neither the time nor inclination, it's not a problem, and I should warn you that it is a very long article. Thanks. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

The Cherry Girl

Hi Tim, Thanks - yes that's great - as I said I started what I thought would be a single paragraph stub to link from another article I have written - but it got to the "early hours" and it was still growing! I know that it needed a full list of all the musical numbers and was going to order the score myself, but you seem already to have access ( I had not wanted to cut and paste from the MIDI website and prefer to go back always to good printed sources if I can). I see you have brought forward its opening date by a few days - the only thing here is that from what I could see, the opening night was continually put back due to what was running in the theatre previously - so we need to be a little careful here to find when it actually did start (as opposed to false starts announced in the press!). Could the William Hay in Act 2 be the "famous" one? I have not been able to prove whether this was one of his early roles. Finally - its really good to see you back - its been on my mind for much of the past year that I had said something! Very best wishes. Richard J Myers (talk)

May 2013

Talk:BBC Symphony Orchestra/GA1

Review has begun..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay I did remember last night but didn't have time to do it. I've passed BBC Symphony Orchestra and uploaded some photos which I think look good and were much needed in replace of that silly empty infobox. I may be a few days in getting to the FA as I have some urgent Indian ones to attend to first which I'm already well behind on!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Savile Row/GA1

Thanks for keeping the GAN open. I thought I wouldn't be able to do anything until next, week, but I did manage to focus down and do some work today. Would you take a look and let me know what else needs doing. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Holst

No PR comments since 29 April - maybe that's it (unless your doctor friend, above, wants to give it a go?). I intend to spend some time on a final readthrough and polish on Saturday; shall we wait until, say, Monday on the off-chance any further comments, and then send it on to FAC? Brianboulton (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I concur. Your turn to do the introductory patter. I have the strong feeling that we both – and you in particular – have laboured harder over this than over Delius. I think it's going to be one of the best articles I have had the honour to be associated with, so there! Zu Montag! Tim riley (talk) 20:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I will do the honours on Monday. This was without doubt the toughest music section I've ever had to write. Mainly my own fault; I knew too little about Holst to begin with, and what I thought I knew was mainly wrong. Plus avoiding reliance on Imogen, which forced me into the hands of Dickinson, the Gobi Desert of music analysts. Ah, well... Some additional good has come from the project: keep an eye on Jane Joseph. And I am considering using my expanded Holst library to have a go at Imogen a little later. I remember the quaint old duck from TV appearances in the 70s - her centre-parting and cut-glass accent in particular. She may be worth doing. Brianboulton (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I have closed the Holst PR, and will nominate at FAC tomorrow, as requested. Now, if you should pick up this message (not guaranteed since the orange message-bar has been retired), can I ask you a couple of favours:-

• Could you consult your archives of listed recordings and see whether anything of Jane Marian Joseph's music has ever been recorded, anywhere?
• On the same lady, I am struggling to find expert assessments of her music. I came across some comments from none other than Havergal Brian, summarised in an article by one P.L. Scowcroft. I'd never heard of him, but a quick google search reveals he is a published author of books and articles on music. His article on Jane Joseph, however, is in the MusicWeb site, which I have a feeling may be disapproved. But if Brian and Scowcroft are reliable sources (as they surely are), then I imagine I can use this material. Any views on this? Brianboulton (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

It will be my privilege and pleasure, though I shall have to get it out of my head that she is the old lady who intends to wear purple with a red hat which doesn't go, and doesn't suit her. I have a pretty clear week ahead, and will wander down to the British Library and rummage. If you have ten minutes to spare I have given Michael Flanders a modest overhaul (aiming at B class, you know - no ambitions further) and any amendments or comments will be gladly received. Tim riley (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I'll look at Flanders (my father was particularly fond of Flanders and Swann). I'll leave any comments on the talk page. Brianboulton (talk) 21:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• Check the talk. Brianboulton (talk) 13:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Colin Davis

I was looking back through and noticed that the Davis portrait bust reference disappeared some years ago after your major edit in 2010ish I think. I'd be interested to know what more you feel would be needed to contemplate replacing it, bearing in mind the reference for the archive of correspondence on the bust between artist and sitter is held in the national Henry Moore Institute archive? (Conversely, I don't think it is currently in a public collection.) kind regards Cazimir (talk) 12:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Holst at FAC

Holst now nominated at FAC. We await the consequences. Brianboulton (talk) 15:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Tim, on 28 April, in an undoubtedly good faith edit, this sentence was removed from the first paragraph: "Among the influences that governed his compositional style, the English folksong tradition was the most prominent." I am embarrassed that I've only just noticed this. The justification given in the edit summary is, broadly, that if we say anything about folksong influence in the lead, something should also be said about the influences of Ravel, Strauss and Stravinsky. I don't think this is right; perhaps the wording "the most prominent" was questionable, but I believe the English folksong was of rather more enduring influence than that of any single composer, including VW. Most sources, Matthews in particular, note the significance of folksong, and I think a lead mention is justified, albeit in modified form. Perhaps "His distinctive compositional style was the product of many influences, including the English folksong revival of the early 20th century". I won't do anything until you have pondered, but please let me know what you think (preferably on my talk as I am still trying out my new orange bar). Brianboulton (talk) 15:11, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I have added the revised wording. Not much activity on the FAC when I last looked, but what's there all good. Brianboulton (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yvonne Printemps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oscar Straus (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) 11:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Stanley Kirkby

Hi Tim, I have just completed an article on the singer Stanley Kirkby. I have put a considerable amount of work into this and would appreciate it if you have any comments (good or bad) to make. Kirkby's life appears to be been written only by what I would call "Internet rumour" in the past few years and I have tried to get back to decent sources to give hopefully a full and balanced account of his life and career and show that he was not just a "music hall" singer. Richard J Myers (talk)

If you could put them on my talk page and I'll take it from there. I'm hoping not too much is required here. (cf. The Cherry Girl - which was just a quickie!). Kirkby "existed" in roughly the same world as Ernest Pike - you may remember that I started the article about him a couple of years ago. Neither was quite as well known as Peter Dawson, but all three were early recording artists from about 100 years ago. Not much has been written about Kirkby or Pike and so finding out about their lives has been quite an interesting challenge and I have certainly enjoyed it. Pike is now back on my agenda as there is further work to do there!

Please also read my comments on the Talk page.Richard J Myers (talk)

Hi - thanks Tim. This is an excellent offer. I am a reader myself, but I live in Staffordshire and don't get down very often. Your suggestion leads me on to a key question about this and other similar articles I have written. I mention recordings, often ones from obscure and short-lived British record companies. Every one of these statements therefore presumably requires a "citation needed" (I have lots of these!) because I do not have some of the record catalogues to hand. What I need is access to these catalogues - e.g. Regal, Scala and Coliseum. However I wouldn't ask you to read through all of these (should they be available in the BL) as it would take a huge amount of time and be about as exciting as watching paint dry! If I can can think of anything else I will let you know during the course of this evening.

If record catalogues no longer exist or cannot be obtained, can the possession of an actual record or a photo of one be deemed as actual proof that the recording exists, so making it an "established fact" therefore obviating the need for a citation needed? Is there a Wikipedia construct that could be used instead of citation needed?

Otherwise thanks for your suggestions about improvements, most of which are fairly minor and I will fix these in the next couple of hours. With regard to G&S, I have stated that Kirkby only took part in earlier recordings. By the time D'Oyly-Carte was on the scene, kirkby was recording for Edison Bell and working with Hudson on his stage shows.Richard J Myers (talk)

Tim, I believe I have fixed 99% of what you suggested. I still have further improvements of my own outstanding plus, of course looking up all the matrix numbers from my record collection; this will be better than the cns! I'm still pondering the oratorio issue for now. Can you find a citation from the BL for the fact that he was cousin of Louise Kirkby Lunn, or even was believed to be? - this would be very helpful. Thanks Richard J Myers (talk)

Hi Tim, Absolutely brilliant. I will add that to the article shortly. I must admit I did wonder why he didn't serve in the War, although it doesn't say I suppose it may have been felt that he was doing good work with some of the propaganda songs he sang. Thanks. Richard J Myers (talk)

Hi Tim, As you can see the article has gone from a stub to a B-Class, the only significant change being the combining of both operatic and popular (mustn't use this word!) recordings. I seem to have lost the battle over oratorio, but not the war. A serious thanks for your help here. One thing I would like your opinion on is that in the second paragraph of the lead, "concert-party performances" has had the hyphen removed. I know that compound adjectives are always hyphenated, but that with nouns this is usually done to make the meaning clear, should it be unclear. Do you think the hyphen should be there in this case? Richard J Myers (talk)

GEbi FAC

Tim, thanks for contributing to the Gospel of the Ebionites second peer review. So far, no one has stepped up to review the article in FAC. A passing comment was made about the reference format. However, it is the same format that is used on the George Harrison feature article; that is the article I relied on as a template to improve the references. Can you take a look at it? Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 19:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Britten

Hi, Tim. I would be happy to work with you on the Britten article. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

That sounds good to me! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:34, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tim riley. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 01:55, 12 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk:John Le Mesurier

Hi Tim, 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.

Harry Graham (poet)

Hi Tim, One of the songs that Stanley Kirkby recorded was "The Galloping major". As I have the original sheet music for this, I have added an article about the song (I have done several other songs as well): The Galloping Major (song). Searching through a box of old Edison cylinders, I found an original recording of this song by Harry Graham (poet) which I believe must be quite rare! I see you have contributed to the Harry Graham article in the past, but no mention is made there or anywhere else on the Internet about Graham being a singer as well as a poet. But it must surely be the same guy, for one, I have found reference to another cylinder in America with an associated article which specifically mentions his dates and secondly, the subject matter of the song is military and he was in the Army? I have heard this song described as a childrens' song; the first verse and chorus maybe, but I think much of the rest (especially the encore verse which is not on any recording) was probably intended for the Officer's Mess! Have you any other proof that he made any recordings? - This is not an urgent request.Richard J Myers (talk)

Hi Tim, Yes I suppose what's needed is a reference to add substance to a new section on his recordings. So perhaps you could have a search when you return from your trip to see if you can find anything. Enjoy the lakes. The link to the website with info on the other cylinder which has a similar number to the one now on the Galloping Major page is: Cylinder Link Richard J Myers (talk)

More Hobbs

Just to let you know that Mr Hobbs is now at FAC here. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Jane Joseph

I'm not sure where you are at the moment, but if you are still online from time to time, could you look at my Jane Joseph effort, at PR? A spin-off from Holst, I admit - but I've got to make the most of all that research and book-buying. Please comment if you can. Brianboulton (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Commas after sentence opening dates

Morning Tim, Could I ask your advice on a peculiarly perplexing piece of punctuation? In involves the use of the comma in the following circumstances at the beginning of sentences: "In 2004, he rode a bike" as opposed to "In 2004 he rode a bike". There is no sub-clause involved, bust the straightforward use of the comma. I always understood that the comma in these circumstances was an American aberration, but I have recently had the following thread placed on my talk page, and my removal of such commas reverted. I note that neither of the two links provided on my thread actually deal with the date format, so I am not sure the posted has read this correctly. Is there anything you can provide by way of clarity for my poor brain?! Much obliged! - SchroCat (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

You are, me judice, absolutely correct both as to introductory dates and to other introductory phrases, whether sub-clauses or no. When a comma is useful to the flow of the prose I use one – e.g. "In May, June visited her mother" – but usually it isn't. Dig your King James Bible out and look at the opening verse: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" – not a hint of a comma. Or from yesterday's Guardian, "As Sir Alex Ferguson was applauded to his seat he remained in character." No comma after seat, where US usage would have one. Yesterday's Telegraph: "Last year the inaugural Chelsea Fringe blew a refreshing gust of trendy horticultural wind through SW3" – no American comma after year. A few other examples from the press:

• On 4 September your story on racial unrest in Gravesend was headlined… (Indie)
• In an article published on 4 September headlined "Kirk seeks peace deal over Loch Lomond vendetta" it was stated … (Scotland on Sunday)
• On 5 December last year the Chief Rabbi of Brussels, Albert Gigi, was walking through Anderlecht… (Observer)
• On 5 December 2008 we published extracts from various websites … (Indie)

But it cannot be denied that the American influence is not being successfully repelled by all English writers; you can find all too many incidences of unnecessary commas as in "On 5 December, we carried a letter from a reader…" (Guardian). Nevertheless, those of us who care about these things should try to keep the standards up as best we can. A few random examples from my commonplace book:

• Last Wednesday I was told that Siegfried was to be produced that evening at Covent Garden. I was incredulous, and asked my informant whether he did not mean Carmen, with Miss Zélie de Lussan in the title part. (Shaw)
• As I felt my way along the wall I collided with what turned out to be a grandfather clock, for the existence of which I had not budgeted, and it toppled over with a sound like the delivery of several tons of coal through the roof of a conservatory (Wodehouse)
• In the dining room residents were making a meal of it—and that was just for starters. (Michael Frayn, The Guardian, 9 November 1994)
• In yesterday's obituary for Dr. John Wilkinson we confused toggle and woggle. Dr. Wilkinson introduced the woggle to Albania, not the toggle. (The Guardian, 2 September 1998)
• This Earle of Oxford, making of his low obeisance to Queen Elizabeth, happened to let a Fart, at which he was so abashed and ashamed that he went to Travell, 7 yeares. On his returne the Queen welcomed him home, and sayd, My Lord, I had forgott the Fart. (John Aubrey, Brief Lives – Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford)
• When at last it came it comprised five whole foolscap pages of small type. ("The Pier That Never Was", The Times, 12 December 1960)
• When Bernard Shaw attacks him it is Shaw who appears a ridiculous pigmy (Duff Cooper).

I think my advice, as you are kind enough to ask for it, is (i) keep the unnecessary comma out of your own prose, (ii) accept that American writers are incurably addicted to it, and (iii) in articles written by English editors, blitz it only by consensus. – Tim riley (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I confess that I am guilty of this. I was taught it at school, and remember being told by a crusty old uni lecturer that using it is a personal preference. A mutual friend uses them too, but then he is American :-) --Cassianto^Talk 15:46, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• Many thanks, Tim. It's all to do with David Attenborough's article, so I'd prefer the British English version in there, but I'll leave a note for the editor concerned pointing to this thread and leave it to his conscience... Many thanks indeed for your help! - SchroCat (talk) 15:53, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Savile Row/GA1

Would you have any objections to me closing the Savile Row review as not-listed so I can clear it from my watchlist? SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Cool. It's closed. Thanks for what you have done in this. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:33, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Rudd Concession

Hi Tim, How are you? I hope you are keeping well. I'm just dropping a short note about the Rudd Concession article I wrote, which has been at FAC for about a month now, and has won a couple supports but needs a few more pairs of eyes I think. It has always been a great pleasure of mine working together in the past, and I'd very much enjoy hearing your thoughts on it if you have the time. The review is here if you are interested. Thanks, and have a great week! —Cliftonian (talk) 11:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Carlton Hotel

Please see my talk page for the conversation on commas. Inglok (talk) 23:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Britten

Happy to see your construction site! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:02, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Hear hear! Feel free to drop me a line when you come to the PR stages and beyond: I may not be able to pick you up on too many things, but always glad to help where I can. All the best - SchroCat (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Tagging files out of copyright in America, but not in their country of origin

I've found a bit of a problem, though one that should be resolved fairly soon: this Mikado poster is from before 1923, but Britain doesn't have a fixed date, just life+70.

That last part doesn't matter here, but does matter on Commons. Now, you uploaded it here, which is fine, but there's some bots that go around tagging things to be transferred to Commons, and it got tagged, and someone didn't check, so it was moved over.

The easiest way to avoid this happening again is to use {{PD-US-1923-abroad}}, which notes the image is in copyright in its home country. If you know the year it clears copyright in the home country (usually the year of death of the artist +71 years [Long story short: clearing copyright can only happen on a January 1st, so you have to up the year count one year higher than you'd think.]).

Alternatively, just shove a {{notcommons}} on the image.

If you're ever in doubt, feel free to ask me on my talk page.

Honestly, the only reason this is important is that Commons is a little bad about moving things back here if they get mistakenly transferred. They'll often just delete them instead. Luckily, I caught this one. =) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 15:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Benjamin Britten 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) 18:54, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Jane Joseph

Now that the FAC page is a little clearer, I've nominated Jane. Please visit at your leisure. I note that you are getting visits from BracketBot, the little minx. Brianboulton (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Purely platonic! She makes herself useful (she does, too!) Shall look in chez Jane as a welcome break from B Britten. Tim riley (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Flashman

It's very kind of you to have become involved and to have gone the extra mile in asking for admin review, and it looks a lot better that in independent editor has done it rather than me forcing the issue! Thanks again and all the best. - SchroCat (talk) 04:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Elizabeth David/GA1

• Talk:Elizabeth David/GA1

GA Review on Hold.

Please see comments at Talk:Elizabeth David/GA1.

NOTE: Please respond, below the entire GA Review, and not interspersed in the GA Review comments themselves. Thank you!

— Cirt (talk) 22:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Update: Passed as WP:GA quality. Congratulations, and thank you very much for being so responsive to the points raised in the GA Review!! — Cirt (talk) 16:19, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

re Elizabeth David

Thanks very much for the kind words! I've got a few projects on the way towards featured candidacy discussions, I suppose I'm a bit nervous, which is probably why I haven't just gone and nominated them yet, but any extra help would be appreciated! — Cirt (talk) 17:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I suppose I could start a 2nd peer review process for Everything Tastes Better with Bacon, but it's had a copy-edit from WP:GOCE so I was just going to go right to WP:FAC. Do you think it's ready for FAC? Or would it make sense to go for a 2nd WP:PR, first? — Cirt (talk) 17:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay but if your comments are anything substantial at all, I think it'd be best to have them in the form of a WP:PR, so let me know if I should start a 2nd one? — Cirt (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that source! I've added it to the article. — Cirt (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• Garner, Dwight (December 8, 2002). "Everything Tastes Better with Bacon". The New York Times Book Review. 107 (49). The New York Times Company: 54.

Any chance you could get access to this source? — Cirt (talk) 18:45, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I also left a note request at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. — Cirt (talk) 18:55, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

All set with this source request thanks to WP:Reference desk, thanks anyways, — Cirt (talk) 02:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The Rite of Spring again

Hi Tim, 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 _><>°^° 17:57, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Update

Update: Now at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Everything Tastes Better with Bacon/archive2, your input would be appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Puncs 'n stuff

Hi Tim.

Now, about this: What about the C. B. Frys and the A. J. Ayers and the J. S. Bachs and the Winston S. Churchills of the world - et many al?

Would you be suggesting Coenraad V. Bos be moved to Coenraad V Bos rather than having to pipe him? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I see where you're coming from now. Thanks.

I certainly agree with the barer style when it comes to postnominals. There's nothing worse than old letters etc addressed to Field-Marshal The Right Honourable The Viscount Tremayne, V. C., G. C. V. O., G. B. E., K. C. M. G., D. S. O., Q. C. and such like. But with personal names I guess I've not quite let go yet. I have moved to the extent of being comfortable now with J.S. Bach rather than J. S. Bach. Yes, we do have tortoises Down Under, and this one is still in the race.  :) Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Efn embarrassment

You may hear the sound of embarrassed shuffling of feet. They're mine: having gone in to try and sort out the footnote problems, I see that all the footnotes are already using the {{efn|}} template. I'll withdraw as gracefully as I can, keep the shreds of my dignity intact, and let you use the 'old school' tag:refs, which I don't know to use! All the best. - SchroCat (talk) 20:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Noises off – elderly knowall laughing his head off! I'll have a go, and then perhaps you can laugh at me when I bugger it up! We shall see. Tim riley (talk) 20:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

It's odd: when I look at Terry-Thomas I see a-b-c in the notes inline and at the bottom - and that's both in IE and Google Chrome. Confused of Surrey! - SchroCat (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Isabeau of Bavaria

Hi Tim, I've sent Isabeau to peer review in preparation for another run at FAC. Your input would be welcome if you have time to give it a look. Thanks. Victoria (talk) 15:53, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Gubby

Seeing your name pop up at Gubby Allen (which I warn you is a long, long way from being ready! And probably will not be for quite a while as I like to let articles "rest" when I'm heartily sick of them, which sums up my feelings for Gubby right now...) reminds me that I meant to ask you if his name pops up in any of your Douglas Home sources. I know that the pair were friends at school, but I was specifically thinking from MCC business in the 1960s, particularly the D'Oliviera affair. Thanks! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:30, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Munch (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) 13:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

History of Gibraltar

Hi Tim, you'll recall that you contributed to the FA review of History of Gibraltar few months ago. I've nominated it at TFAR for July 13, the tercentenary of Gibraltar becoming a British territory. If you have any thoughts on this you're very welcome to comment at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#July 13. Prioryman (talk) 20:32, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Royal Philharmonic Orchestra 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) 11:41, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

TPO

Hi Tim, in case there is any misunderstanding, I didn't mean you should stop writing! I was enjoying watching the article develop, it is of interest to me. I've left quibbles on the PR, more to follow. Best. Ceoil (talk) 06:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members). So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 15:08, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Alkan

Dear Tim, I know you have tons on your plate, but I am writing to ask if you may be willing to take on the GA review for Charles-Valentin Alkan. It's been up for review for a few weeks, but no takers yet ..... or maybe you know of someone else who might take up the burden? I'm hoping to get it up to FA for CVA's birthday in November. Thanks anyway, and hoping this doesn't end up in the compost heap! Best, --Smerus (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Very grateful - I look forward to your comments (I think)! Best,--Smerus (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Wow! What service! Many thnaks for your kind words and helpful suggestions. I have ten days of hell coming up (visit to Minsk and then organising international conference in Kiev), but if I a)get a moment and b)survive, I will gladly look at RPO. Best, --Smerus (talk) 17:23, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Isabeau of Bavaria/archive2

Tim, could you briefly revisit the FAC review, above, and consider a point I've raised about the ordering of the prose? Many thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 13:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

"If we go down, at least that bugger Barnes will go down with us."

I'm not sure how familiar you are with Archie MacLaren, but his inevitably long article is at PR here, and as ever your comments would be gratefully received if you have the time and inclination. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

As I believe I have mentioned before, I am from God's side of the Pennines, and I do indeed know of MacLaren. I even know one or two nice things about him. Shall gladly PR him. Tim riley (talk) 21:38, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:PerGrunden.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:PerGrunden.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Alec Douglas-Home for TFA on 2nd July?

To mark the 110th anniversary of his birth, perhaps? Or have you another preference? Bencherlite^Talk 15:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

London in the 1960s

Hi Tim! I wondered if you or Brian who I suspect are "baby boomers" might be interested in nurturing this. Aside from needing a majr copyedit it is a bit too pop culture-oriented, it needs more info on events and building changes. Can you look into it sometime? Perhaps you could borrow a book on the history of London like this to help improve it? It's a "Swinging" article which I'd hope would interest you!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Benjamin Britten 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ] and [[NMC Recordings|NMC]].<ref name=complete>"Decca announces first Britten complete works"], Britten100, Britten-Pears Foundation, 2012, accessed 15 June 2013</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Benjamin Britten may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• the Chorus of [[Opera North]] and the Chorus of the [[Guildhall School of Music and Drama]].<ref>[[http://www.aldeburgh.co.uk/events/grimes-beach "Grimes on the Beach",] aldeburgh.co.uk, accessed
• aldeburgh.co.uk/events/grimes-beach "Grimes on the Beach",] aldeburgh.co.uk, accessed 17 June 2013}}; and [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-22938641 "In pictures: Britten's Peter Grimes

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Herbert James Rowse 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• (1926) may evoke in us admiration untinged with affection."<ref>[[Gavin Stamp|Stamp, Gavin]]. [[http://www.jstor.org/stable/991247 "Charles Reilly and the Liverpool School of Architecture, 1904–

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Frederick Ashton may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s and 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) 13:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Benjamin Britten may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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) 16:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Benjamin Britten 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) 13:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

2013 or 2014??

I was happy to help.....!! Good luck with your summer project at ROH, and look forward to report on it. Shall be in London in early November for Les vêpres. Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:41, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Book query

Do you happen to know if there are significant differences between the 2003 and 2013 editions of David Matthews's biography of BB? Or was the latter a centenary spin-off reprint? Brianboulton (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a short preface to the 2013 impression, but it's definitely a straight reprint of the 2003 book otherwise. Don't know if the extra preface changes the page numbers in the rest of the book; probably not, as Matthews adopts the useful old-fashioned device of giving prefatory pages Roman numerals and starting with 1. when the main text begins. I'm going to the BL tomorrow anyway and can double check on this point. Tim riley (talk) 15:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Alec Douglas-Home

This is a note to let the main editors of Alec Douglas-Home know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 2, 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/July 2, 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:

Alec Douglas-Home

Alec Douglas-Home (1903–95) was a British Conservative politician who served as Prime Minister from October 1963 to October 1964. His reputation rests more on his two spells as the UK's foreign minister than on his brief, uneventful premiership. As parliamentary aide to Neville Chamberlain, he witnessed at first hand Chamberlain's efforts to preserve peace before the Second World War. In 1951 he inherited the earldom of Home and became a member of the House of Lords. Under Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden and Harold Macmillan he was appointed to posts including Leader of the House of Lords and Foreign Secretary. In October 1963 Macmillan resigned as Prime Minister. Home was controversially chosen to succeed him, renouncing his earldom and winning election to the House of Commons. He was criticised by the Labour Party as an out-of-touch aristocrat, and he came over stiffly in television interviews. After narrow defeat in the 1964 general election he resigned as party leader; he later served under Edward Heath as Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. After the defeat of the Heath government in 1974 he retired from front-line politics. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Jack Brymer wiki

You removed an edit I made to this page, calling it uncited trivia. And then the message I posted here to discuss it, you removed saying something about gibberish being moved to the compost heap. It isn't gibberish. The "uncited trivia" you referred to is taken from the wiki page that it linked to... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Day_in_the_Life — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.76.83 (talk) 14:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The Company of Heaven

The Company of Heaven was started, I would like to add but don't have time right now, improvements welcome, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

What you added is lovely and has a wonderful personal note to it. - I prepared a DYK nomination - only to find out that it is too old, - or can we expand a lot? ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:18, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Is there a chance of a picture of Britten in the 1930s? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Not a free one, I'm afraid, and I don't think fair use could apply in an article about one of his works as opposed to about Britten himself. By the way, I am highly doubtful about the status of File:Benjamin Britten-Karsh.jpg in Commons, and User:Ruhrfisch, who knows all about images, has kindly undertaken to check it when time permits. I may have to rely on a "fair use" image of Britten for the main biographical article, but we shall see. Tim riley (talk) 08:59, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I found angels, though ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The naughty vicar

Harold Davidson is in the dock at peer review. Let justice be swift and impartial. Brianboulton (talk) 15:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it too, no need to leave a note.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Benjamin Britten image

I will be glad to look at it but it will take me a few days.Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

This has proven to be much more complicated than I expected. Still looking into it, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I am pretty sure it is not a free image - I laid out my findings at Talk:Benjamin Britten. I have found an image that I believe is free. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for all your great work here - I am glad to help. I copied my concerns to the suspect image's talk page on Commons and notified the uploader there. I may someday get back to needing peer reviews for articles I write - if so I may ask for your assistance there. I think it would be good if someone other than me reviewed the images for Britten at FAC (as I should not check my own upload). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Jacques Offenbach/GA1

Very nearly there, a few tweaks and it's good to go (and I'd suggest going on straight to a peer review, the next step for FA status, afterwards) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 10:10, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Caps issue

When you are free from your Royal Ballet duties, would you mind pronouncing on a capitals issue that has arisen in the esteemed Wehwalt's comments on Wikipedia:Peer review/Harold Davidson/archive1? I am awarding you the casting vote. Brianboulton (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

The GEbi article was promoted to FA today. Thank you for your helpful comments and support, both in peer review and FAC. Cheers! Ignocrates (talk) 16:44, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Greetings!

Wonderful to meet you yesterday - quite hope you survived the post-Ballet revels.Gareth E Kegg (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Paris

Thanks, I'll try to get it vigorously edited this week and overhaul the referencing. As you say the content is pretty good and with a bit of editing I think we could whip it into GA shape. I was going to ask if you were interested in reviewing Marrakesh for GA and I only saw this article in the queue then, but after seeing this I see you've already got a lot on your plate so no worries. I did though want a very good reviewer as I intend taking Marrakesh to FA at some point, it has been well enough researched.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:18, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Davidson peer review

Could I ask that you briefly revisit Wikipedia:Peer review/Harold Davidson/archive1, to comment on an issue I have raised concerning the use of this image. Many thanks Brianboulton (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Elgar Cello Concerto page

Hello, I am passionate about the cello and its repertoire. I have tried to add a paragraph to the Elgar Cello concerto page twice and, on both occasions, it was deleted. It was essential, unopinionated information about the 1985 Best Classical recording award given to the RPO recording of the Elgar cello concerto with Julian Lloyd Webber and Sir Yehudi Menuhin. Please can you let me know if my edit was in any way incorrect and how I can put the text back on the Wikipedia page? Many thanks and kind regards, Michela — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.55.29 (talk) 20:32, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I fear I have been high-handed and unhelpful. I'll look up the refs and restore the info. Meanwhile, may I urge you to register a Wikipedia user name, to join our editing community fully? You will be most welcome. Tim riley (talk) 20:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your super-fast reply! I would really appreciate it if you could restore the text, thank you! I am new to the Wikipedia editing community, I didn't know I had to register, I thought logging in as a user was sufficient.My Wikipedia user name is Cocolinmichela (my real name Michela Cocolin). I had text and video links removed from other pages (as well as the Elgar cello page) by another user in the past and would like to make sure I am not doing anything wrong, so that it doesn't happen again. Thanks again for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.55.29 (talk) 20:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear Michela, welcome. Please give me a day or two, as I am about to be away (though online) from tomorrow morning. I will attend to the best of my ability to your comments above and report back. Tim riley (talk) 20:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I shall try to find out more about editing on Wikipedia in the meantime. Best wishes, Michela — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.55.29 (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Company of Heaven

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Stephen Potter

Hi,

About two years ago I sent you a message complimenting you on your work on the page about Stephen Potter. Which I totally stand by, incidentally.

I've since acquired more of his books, including his Nonesuch edition of Coleridge, his early books A Muse In Chains and Coleridge and S.T.C. and his later corporate history of Heinz, The Magic Number. These have changed my picture of him as a writer a good deal, and I hope to get back to this article soon with some more detail. Just keeping you posted. Lexo (talk) 23:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Fishing for help

Hi Tim, I hope all is well with you. I've been tinkering in user space from time to time with "Die Forelle", Schubert's rather pleasant lied. I've moved it all to the article space today, but I'm still not overly happy with it, partly because I'm such a duffer at the musical angle. Could you have a glance over it at some point and highlight a few major issues? Don't worry in the slightest if you're already tied up on other things - it's not important and with what I've done is probably only a GA at best, but I'd like to make it a good GA, if I can. Many thanks indeed for all your help! - SchroCat (talk) 21:20, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

That's very good of you: many thanks indeed. I think I may have a few bits in wrong sections, and my inexperience on music articles isn't helping getting the text flowing at all! Lovely part of the world where you are: I am currently sweltering in the Med and counting off the days til I'm Blighty-bound! - SchroCat (talk) 21:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Together in life, death, and now Wikipedia...

Peter Pears in Owen Wingrave

What's an article on Britten without a picture of Pears? Enjoy, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

You are very welcome - I was looking to see if any of the other pictures of Britten on eBay might be free here and saw this magnificently be-whiskered visage in black and white. I wonder if File:St Peter and St Paul's Church, Aldeburgh, Suffolk.jpg (of the church where he and Pears are buried) might be worth including in the article? Also would one of the photos of the Snape Maltings hall be worth including in the article too? See Commons:Category:Snape Maltings Concert Hall. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful! Is there any chance to have an image of the young Pears, as he may have looked singing The Company of Heaven? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Gerda - the oldest photo of Pears I found on eBay was from 1962 and had a prominent watermark (plus probably not enough information on provenance to use freely on Commons). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:42, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Alkan again....

Now up for FA. Best, --Smerus (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Isabeau of Bavaria

Tim, profound thanks for your helpful comments during the peer review and for your warm support during this effort - which wasn't one of the easiest I've undertaken. Victoria (talk) 00:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

London in November

Thanks for your note, Tim. I'll get in touch when we get closer to the time. Viva-Verdi (talk) 14:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Harold Davidson at FAC

I have nommed the errant rector. Let's see if he gets his just deserts. Can you give me a rough deadline for detailed work on the Britten music section, so that I can plan my next few weeks' activities? Brianboulton (talk) 19:26, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello

Could you please explain this summary?[4] "reverting falsified quote to ipsissima verba"? What on earth did I do? That edit summary is extremely hostile! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear ChrisGualtieri, I think Tim riley is away temporarily. I saw this edit. You changed the date format in a quote so that the quote was wrong. When you make automated edits, please be careful not to change quoted material. You may wish to review changes you have made in other articles to see if you have changed quoted material. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 12:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tim riley. You have new messages at ChrisGualtieri's talk page.
Message added 15:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Home

Good to see the Main page as a home for Home, - your reputation rests on articles like that (thanks for a new phrase!) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Britten – Matthews page refs

Ref 70 ("Matthews, p. 870") is clearly a typo. However, if the correct page ref is 87, there's a slight problem with my own Matthews refs (Nos 162, 164, 165, 169 and 170). As I think I mentioned earlier, I am using the 2003 edition of the Matthews book, in which the Britten-Menhuin visit to Belsen is on page 83, not 87. Would you mind checking out my Matthews refs in your 2013 edition? Brianboulton (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Well caught! All done. Tim riley (talk) 10:15, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Tim - would you please check out the short paragraph I have just added to the Music section, on BB's incidental music? Brianboulton (talk) 21:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

(added): I think there ought to be a sentence in the biographical section establishing that BB wrote a lot of incidental music for stage and radio plays – much of it unpublished and forgotten – in the late 30s and early 40s, rather than having the first mention in the music section. Brianboulton (talk) 09:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

(also added) You will note from the article's edit history that I am adding further bits of material to the music section. Please check 'em out, delete if not appropriate. Brianboulton (talk) 19:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Paris

Unfortunately you've caught this at a moment when QatarLeague added a lot of bare url links for sources which now need to be formatted. I still need a few days on this, but you should see that considerable improvements have already been made.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:30, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Doubting Thomas' / Thomas's

Hi Tim, Cassianto and I are in the process of copy editing the article on Terry-Thomas, which should be going to PR in a few days. Before we get that far, could you let me know which possessive form we should be using: Terry-Thomas' or Terry-Thomas's? I've been happily using the first version, but now have doubts that this may be incorrect: could you shed a little light on my darkness? Many thanks, as always - SchroCat (talk) 16:01, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• (Butting in): In British English the earlier possessive is generally only used for names such as Moses or Jesus (i.e. names ending in "s-vowel-s") and not always then. It is not used for names that just happen to end in "s" such as "Thomas"; you would not write something like: "Thomas' performance was excellent". I think that in some American writing the shorter possessive is more generally used, but the tendency is not evident in American literature. Brianboulton (talk) 19:08, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I concur with BB. I am currently reviewing Paris for GA, and am jibbing there at Paris' as the possessive rather than Paris's. (Things become a bit more fluid with polysyllabic words – I might write Aristophanes' rather than Aristophanes's, but I don't know that the style guides would approve.) Tim riley (talk) 19:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
    • The general rule in the U.S. is that if you would pronounce the 's as es, then you add 's. If not, then just s'. For example, you would say: "Thomases wife is Natalie", so you would write Thomas's. But you would say "Euripides' plays are poor", so you just punctuate it with the apostrophe. If I recall correctly, this is consistent with MOS. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:38, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
      • Many thanks to you all! I've made the required adjustments as per your advice. - SchroCat (talk) 20:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Anyone for tennis? Hard cheese old boy!

It's an absolute shower! The King of the Cads is at PR. If there is any chance you could pop your head round to have a look, Cassianto and I would be very much obliged. All the best – SchroCat (talk) 23:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• By the by, I see that Doc B has re-nominated [for FAC] again. I only mention it in passing as I saw you were a fellow traveller of that route last time round. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Frederick Ashton

This article gets better and better, largely due to your hard work. The stuff about Alice Hofmannsthal was particularly amusing, so have copied it over to her article. And I've started an article on another contemporary of Fred's, choreographer Andrée Howard. Edwardx (talk) 12:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Can you help pleeeese?

I am looking for a book review of Christopher Matthew's Diary of a Somebody, published in 1980. This is the fictional diary of one Simon Crisp, a 1970s descendent of Pooter. Matthews wrote two other Crisp diaries, Loosely Engaged and The Crisp Report, published in 1980-81, and the three together were published as an omnibus in 1988. I am sure the books would have been reviewed in the Guardian, Observer, Telegraph etc, though I can find nothing online. Can you help? It's reviews of the first that I am particularly interested in. Much thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 20:32, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

A privilege and pleasure. Shall report back on your talk page on Mon or Tues, I hope. Tim riley (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in, I've found three, but copyrighted alas. [5] [6] [7] Gareth E Kegg (talk) 20:39, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Please always feel free to butt in here, my dear sir. Benny Green's Spectator review looks very promising, and I'll get the British Library experts on to it next week. Tim riley (talk) 21:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

No need to wait - the Spectator archives went online last month. Here's the review. ("Matthew has saved everyone, including himself, an immense amount of embarrassment by actually writing a funny book") Andrew Gray (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

That's marvellous! Thank you so much Andrew. I'll make sure Brian B is aware. (So many friends looking in here that I feel I should offer tea and biscuits, or, for tennis fans, of whom I'm not one, champagne.) Tim riley (talk) 18:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks all round for this superb help. The Spectator review will do just fine (though why does he call Crisp "Cusp"? Dodgy spellchecker maybe?) Brianboulton (talk) 18:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Brian, The first book came out in '78, according to the BL. I can find a brief review each in the archives of the Guardian or Observer, which I have emailed to you; Matthew also ran a column "Crisp at Large" in The Observer in 1980-81. Hope this helps. - SchroCat (talk) 19:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

James White, charity work

I'm only really interested in him as a racehorse owner, but I found this[8] which could be added as an example of his philanthropic activities. Tigerboy1966  13:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Paris

Tim. Unfortunately some German editor has made a complete hash of my editing which he dismisses as "lazy" and has restored the excessive demographic data (which few people really care for in the main article) and replaced my comprehensive district guide down to an unsourced crappy bulleted list again. I'm not tolerating that. I'll be reverted by him if I restore and an edit war will ensue. I'm not putting up with this. I strongly suggest his edits are undone and the article is restored.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:44, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

God bless and save us! There's always one isn't there! That very perceptive editor SchroCat is ahead of me in reverting the recent deleterious changes, but if the offending editor tries to muck up the agreed version again I shall be there to revert, as, I imagine, will other editors who have the interests of the reader in mind rather than some recondite personal agenda. – Tim riley (talk) 21:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou, I really appreciate it. And thanks for the review! Yes, his name "Der Statistiker" says it all, he's started a crusade against it because he didn't like me significantly cutting the stats in the demographics section which is excessive for the article, we don't need big lboated tables like that. I think it is important to provide some information on each of the 20 arrondissements, there are 400 districts as Stat says so at least covering the arrondissements of the city of Paris is a must in my opinion. Certainly restoring a haphazard, unsourced section with bullet points is not an improvement and a degrade.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 09:21, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this article Tim, I much appreciate it.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 18:31, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Automatic spelling buggerer

An exasperating innovation suddenly polluting the edit screen is some ghastly code that changes all my English spellings into American, so that I have to go back and turn them all into English again. Does any kind visitor to this page know how to switch this loathsome device off? –Tim riley (talk) 18:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm struggling with that too, I'm afraid! I don't know whether it's an Internet Explorer thing, or a Wiki thing. - SchroCat (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

More Britten

I have just added a rather hefty chunk of prose to the music section, on the Canticles. I've probably overdone it in my enthusiasm, so don't hesitate to cut it down to whatever size you think appropriate. One thing you will have to do is check the additional Matthews refs. This time I have anticipated the latest edition by adding 4 to my edition's paging, but you had better check that this is right. Brianboulton (talk) 19:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

May your shadow never grow less! Your riding to the rescue is above and beyond the call of duty, and I am truly grateful. Shall check the page nos. Tim riley (talk) 20:15, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I'd have a humble present for the upcoming birthday, {{Benjamin Britten}}, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda. Will it default to "expanded"? I fear that might rather overwhelm some of the shorter articles. A default to "collapsed" would be my preference. It's a fine piece of work, though it is also a stern reminder of the number of Britten articles yet to be written! Tim riley (talk) 12:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

You do that to your liking (I change to collapse for now), also perhaps reduce, by not mentioning stubs (they could be commented out now, to be ready when expanded). - The unwritten articles are not yet in there, I think of the Te Deum, - that might be a good DYK on his birthday, thinking of it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'm rather hoping that the Benjamin Britten article (now at Peer Review here – do look in!) will be promoted to FA in time to be TFA on the composer's centenary. Tim riley (talk) 13:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I hope the same, will look myself, - but we (very general we) still could do the other also. I sang it ages ago. What's the official name, Festival Te Deum (Britten)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the Britten page can comfortably accommodate the expanded version of the template, and I have added it like that. Very good it looks, too. For the articles on individual works I think perhaps the collapsed version will be preferable. What say you, Gerda (or anyone else, too)? Tim riley (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I would know how to do always closed, always open, closed if there is another navbox, - but not what you want. I will ask a technical expert, later, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I found out that you can add the option at the article, for example collapsed for a short article: {{Benjamin Britten|state=collapsed}}, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Just so. I've added a collapsed version at Les Illuminations (Britten). See what you think. Tim riley (talk) 21:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I had done the same for the Company. For the songs, I replaces the ";" by normal bolding, it's better for people using screenreaders. DYK that Bluthochzeit, my second opera article after Lolita, was on DYK today? (still pictured on my user) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I added Britten to the lead of this bio, - could you check it, I didn't write that one (most of the others, though), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Archie

I just blundered onto your Britten PR page to leave some comments, and realised that I forgot to inform you that Archie is now at FAC here, and that any further comments are always welcome. Hoping that having him at FAC is not a bad omen for this week... Sarastro1 (talk) 17:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I had this email yesterday from a friend who is a retired sports journo in Melbourne: "I suspect you are looking forward to the first Test with considerably more pleasure than am I. What a rabble of a team, a rabble of selectors, with very little hope that they will acquit themselves with any style or class. Saving, perhaps Michael Clark, if his back injury allows."

Thank you for your comments so far on Britten. Very much to the point, and I'm looking forward to more when you have time. Tim riley (talk) 17:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid years and years of bitter defeats, and vivid memories of every Ashes series from 1989-2005, leave me more nervous than I probably should be, particularly since Lehmann (an honorary Yorkshireman if ever there was one) took over as coach. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:54, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Kanak people

Hi Tim, do you think this has FA potential? I think with the referencing converted to sfn and a slight restructuring it has potential. I'm considering readdressing it and placing for a peer review. It would be amazing to have an FA on Oceania. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

It looks good, but my first reaction is that 42,523 bytes is on the short side for an article that purports to cover an entire people. Then again, perhaps there's no more to be said. Certainly there's no obvious gap that caught my eye, but I'm wholly ignorant of the subject and someone more expert might have views. – Tim riley (talk) 13:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Remember that's it New Caledonia though not an American tribe or a major western world people! I believe we researched it as much as we could and it ended up being more comprehensive than I'd ever imagined. I think we've covered it well, just needs a polish I think but I have a feeling it has potential. I've done your cookbook review BTW!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Point taken. My uninformed comment rather illustrates why I'm not the best person to consult on this one, though I'll gladly join in any peer review or FAC, as I need hardly say. Thanks for the note about Mrs David's GAN. I've responded on the review page accordingly. Lots of good points, for which I'm truly grateful. Tim riley (talk) 23:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on the first cookery book section of GA which I've just opened! Excellent job as usual! I might see if I can get Aymatth2 interested in promoting Kanak people, he might find more on them in JSTOR, which like Highbeam I'm currently deprived of as my year subscription ran out!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

You are most welcome Master Timothy, I've been enjoying the sunshine so I did it earlier than later. Funnily enough there is a young editor on here from Mauritius or the Maldives I always get them mixed up, and rather than write about his exotic Indian Ocean country he produces featured articles on Beyonce albums and singles... Americanization huh... I wanna know about things like Mauritian canoes and dances!! 16:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I was press-ganged last year into service by this young person to review an article about Beyonce, of whom I had never heard until then. Not my area of expertise, but his sheer enthusiasm shone out of the page, which is always a delight even when one doesn't share the same interest. I shall approach the Kanak article with a similar cast of mind, if you let me know when it needs a review. Tim riley (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Overlooked?

Sorry to bother you, Tim, but you may have overlooked a request/suggestion that appears earlier on this talkpage, re Britten. At the moment, the first mention that he wrote incidental music for theatre/cinema is in the Music section, in a paragraph added by me. As he wrote rather a lot of this stuff in his earlyish career, I think there should be a something (the odd sentence, perhaps) about this in the biographical sections of the article, to provide a context for the reference in the Music section. Brianboulton (talk) 10:02, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I did indeed overlook it – mea culpa. An excellent suggestion. Will deal without further delay. Tim riley (talk) 10:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

And now done: third para of Benjamin Britten#Early professional life. About the right length, do you think? By all means prune ad lib. Tim riley (talk) 17:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks pretty well OK to me. You will see that I am adding bits and pieces and pruning here and there in the article. Tell me if you want me to stop. Brianboulton (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Good God, no! All contributions most gratefully received. Pooh-Bah, I appoint you Lord High Conominator! Tim riley (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, the article has just topped the 10000 wordcount thanks largely to my accretions. And, having just read through the Music section again for the nth time, I feel it needs to be rounded off by a short "legacy" section. I am working on this now (not more than 250 words). I will be honoured to co-nominate if you think my contribution merits this, but I'll leave that to you - it is at least 80% your work. Brianboulton (talk) 19:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The wordcount does not elude me, but I have these FA figures up my sleeve in case of flak:

• Mahler 94,360 bytes
• Wagner 100,854 bytes
• Elgar 112,004 bytes
• Tchaikovsky: 122,650 bytes

and, ladies, gentlemen, and fellow Scousers, I give you:

• Paul McCartney: 174,304 bytes – 20:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I have added "Legacy" to the Music section. A bit longer than I intended, will see if I can trim down (though I don't think that overall, the music section is overlong for such an important composer) Brianboulton (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Tim, can you answer a point that's been raised on my talkpage about the Britten centenary. Brianboulton (talk) 21:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I think I have done all I can do with the Music section. I have cut out a few bits where pieces were merely mentioned without any musical detail, and added a few other bits. I think it looks OK now, but time – and FAC – will tell. At the FAC I will restrict myself to dealing with comments on this section, except where I am needed to wade in on any general issues. The article looks generally in fine shape, and it should do well. Brianboulton (talk) 07:43, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

It's all your fault!

Just for the record, I hold you entirely responsible for today's frankly implausible events, on the basis of this edit. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

(smugly smiling) My partner, who migrated to Australia from Sri Lanka, is literally beside himself.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Just wait till tomorrow, gentlemen! You will be amazed. Tim riley (talk) 21:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Gah

I looked right at it and I still hit okay, gah! Thanks for catching it. I swear if this was the template format I'd not slip it up. I will ask Ohconfucius about this one so I don't keep screwing it up accidentally. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You are very forgiving to refrain from throwing bricks at me for being pedantic! Tim riley (talk) 20:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Britten article as FA

Greetings, Tim, from Santa Fe where we have a fabulous La donna del lago on stage this summer!

The Britten article is coming along and now looks amazing!! (And it reads very well too! Which makes trying to get the Verdi article to look anything as good rather problematical with the tons of work involved.)

One suggestion: keep the References as the single main heading word, which is "standard" elsewhere with opera articles, but also keep "Notes" (maybe then make then A,B,C?? rather than 1,2,3??). Then label the linked-in "Notes" from the text as "Footnotes" to distinguish them?? It would keep the "look" as established in the the major WP:Opera guidelines but also use dual versions of the word "notes". Viva-Verdi (talk) 01:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Nice to hear from you. The Lady bobbed out of the Lake over here, too, recently, but I prefer Rossini when he's being comic. Thank you very much for your kind remarks in re Benjamin Britten. The snag about altering the ref format for Britten is that it would then be out of synch with the other composer articles we have already got to FA, which generally follow the layout and labelling used here. I'm not surprised Verdi is a daunting task. So long a life and so many works! On my to-do list, and getting nearer the top, is Falstaff, which I hope to get to FA in the next year or so, and which I hope will meet with your approval if and when it happens. Tim riley (talk) 08:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Moving an image into Wikimedia Commons

Greetings. Following an inquiry I'd made, I gathered the scanned image of Maggie Teyte as Cherubino could be in Wikimedia Commons under {{PD-art-two|PD-old|PD-1923}}

This illustration by George Cecil Wilmshurst appears here and here as well. Wilmshurst was born in 1873, according to English Wikipedia, or in 1874 according to London 1901 census. He was active between 1897-1917, according to his viaf page. He died in 1930.

I would be much grateful if you do so, for I could use your excellent scan on other Wikis.

Regards, ש. יונתן (talk) 04:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC).

I don't get involved much with Commons, and I don't know its rules and procedures well enough to feel confident about uploading this image. Naturally I'd have no objection to your copying it over if you know how. Alternatively you could upload the image to your local Wikipedia. Sorry not to be more use. Tim riley (talk) 07:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Mont Juic et al

Dear Tame McOrally

I like where you've been going with Britten. Koussevitzky must have been crazy, or ill-advised, to prefer the z. I'm sure he has multiple redirects. It's a minor matter of minuscule moment.

Did you see my personal contribution to the Britten centenary - Mont Juic (suite)? Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasant conversation]} 20:02, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Britten

Morning Mr R, Just looking over Britten at FAC and I see there's quite a bit of overlinking in the Influences section. Is this deliberate, or are you happy for me to de-link the offending terms? Pip pip - SchroCat (talk) 07:51, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

For these enormous Life and Works articles there seems to be an unwritten understanding that it is helpful to the reader if the Works half is treated for the purpose of wikilinking almost as though it is a separate article: i.e. one starts from scratch, though common sense may dictate that a second link is not needed. For instance, it would be silly to link to a key figure like Pears at his first mention in the Music section. If you spot anything linked twice within either the Life half or the Music half please blitz, but one link from Life and one from Music is par for the course, I think. Tim riley (talk) 08:17, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Support that, it's helpful for someone interested in that section alone, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thought there might be a good reason behind it! I'll check for duplicates within the relevant sections then. Many thanks! - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Well deserved promotion. I have this crazy dream of Falstaff for Verdi's birthday ... - let's start improving, even if we don't get that fa[r]! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Gerda. As for Falstaff, I'm assembling stuff, and have doodled a bit of background stuff: see User:Tim riley/sandbox5. More to come, but I'm not sure when. Feel free to add to that sandbox if you want. I'm not ready for the main space yet. Tim riley (talk) 09:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:00, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

T-T, back in the spotlight

Thanks again for your previous help at PR for the T-T article. The old chap is in the spotlight of FAC, although the stage is a rather crowded one at the moment. I hope you'll have the time to pop along to see him once again. Many thanks - SchroCat (talk) 11:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Knights of Columbus

Hi, Tim! Thanks so much for the review of the Knights of Columbus article. I do appreciate it, and you had some excellent suggestions. I tried to address all of them, and plan on putting it up for Featured Article status again. If there is anything else you can suggest beforehand, I would very much appreciate it. Thanks again! --Briancua (talk) 19:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Change

Hi Tim, just so you, Brian and anybody else watching this page knows, I, the artist formerly known as Dr. Blofeld is resuming as User:Tibetan Prayer now, marking an end of DYK contributing and a new era of focusing more on GA and FA and editing outside of DYK. Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 08:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Good gracious! Well, the very best of luck in your new persona. Tim riley (talk) 08:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Britten

Tim, some of your reversions appear to be a bit sweeping. I couldn't figure out exactly which deleted material you restored today at 09:26, but part of your edit undid Ian Rose's correct insertion of a comma betweeen the honours and his moving the WL for pacifism to the first occurrence. Your revert of the semicolons also undid removal of a redundant word ("most particularly" is pompous). After the somewhat WP:OWNy reversion of the semicolons (by "semicolons preferred" you declare your preference to overrule someone else's) I won't be continuing to help there, but you might want at least to restore Ian Rose's corrections. --Stfg (talk) 10:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Good heavens! What on earth have I pressed? So sorry. Will investigate. Just trying to restore some lost content and add a ref. Ascribe it to incompetence, not malevolence. (On the punct matter, all other reviewers were okay with semicolons, including Chris the Speller, whose expert help I sought before going up to FAC, so I thought I'd revert to a consensus view.) Tim riley (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry if I overlooked some previous agreement, but my search seems to suggest the opposite consensus. Semicolons aren't mentioned on the article's talk page. In the peer review, Wehwalt's 7th bullet was saying it should be commas, and your reply was "All these points are spot-on, and I've acted on every one. Thank you, Wehwalt." I find nothing on Chris the Speller's talk page either. What have I missed? --Stfg (talk) 12:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Chris, to whom I am as always most grateful, checked the whole article on 14 July. I felt rather proud that he found only a little to tweak. My besetting sin is opening a subordinate clause with a comma and then forgetting to close it with another, but not this time, happily. I've just looked at your user page, and note your WP-avocations with interest. Are you, perhaps, available to be importuned, like the heroic Chris, to vet potential FAs? Not a task I envy anyone, but I'm very glad there are those happy to do it! – Tim riley (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Chris edited the article on July 15th to correct two minor issues of punctuation, and now I've seen your request to him and his reply on his talk page, but there is no mention of semicolons. Certainly, he didn't find all the errors in the article, for example the stray definite article in "In the English provinces of the early 20th century, the distinctions of social class were taken very seriously." In general, I would say that editors improve articles incrementally, and it is plain wrong to claim that, because one editor has done this or that, the way they left it established a "consensus" that can be used to overrule other editors who make further improvements. The consensus, if there is any, is that those semicolons should become commas, and you shouldn't have said that you had acted on every one of Wehwalt's points when you hadn't. Can I be pinged to vet potential FAs? No, I don't think so. Not if the undo button is going to be hit on me and consensus used as the excuse when there really isn't one. --Stfg (talk) 13:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh dear! Well, never mind. Thank you anyway. 13:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Art in Medieval Scotland/GA1

Hi, I advised the author of this not to bunch and replicate books in the notes section and put them underneath. I began converting them to sfn notes and thought he'd be happy to continue but he seems rather upset with beginning to overhaul the references. Sfn isn't compulsory but isn't it ill-advised not to replicate books in the notes and also underneath? Care to comment? Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 19:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I've commented at the GAN page. Tim riley (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I have a question at the bottom of my input to date at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Charles-Valentin Alkan/archive1 on the use of "amongst" and "whilst". I don't know whether you'd consider amongst in the same way as whilst, but I remember you picked up on it in my articles and I wondered if you could give your opinion on the matter. Off to enjoy some sunshine now, thanks!Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 13:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear me! What a crabbed old pedant I am turning into have always been. I have, I confess, a list of words that get straight up my hooter, including whilst, amongst and commence, among many others. If asked my opinion I give it, but when an experienced editor with a distinguished record prefers to use any of them I don't comment unless asked to. It's a matter of personal preference when all is said. "Commence" for example, is perfectly correct English: it's just that "start" is shorter and less, well, prissy. Whilst" and "amongst" somehow make me want to blow the dust off the top of them. To each his own. Tim riley (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Music

How are you with 1900s popular songs? Could you find if Charles Ridgewell and Will Godwin's "If Those Lips Could Only Speak" was adapted from a French tune? (Related to Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang, unsurprisingly another Indonesia article) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I have been known to dabble in Edwardian stuff. Shall have a rummage and report back. Tim riley (talk) 12:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks. I'm curious, as Kwee (the author) says "Mimi D'amour" and Fowler (the translator) says it was quite a popular song, but the only version I can find online is credited to Reda Caire, apparently released after the book, and has lyrics which are nowhere near what Kwee presents. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Nothing about it (and precious little about them) in any of the obscure online sources I use, but I shall be at the British Library tomorrow, and will have a browse on the open shelves. Tim riley (talk) 12:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, I hope you're not going too far out of your way. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:17, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• No trouble. I'll just need to walk across from one reading room to another, which is well within my capacity even at my advanced age. BTW, I live twelve mins walk from the BL and am always happy to do any looking up I can if wanted by Wikicolleagues. Don't be shy about asking at any point. Mind you, there's no guarantee of success! Tim riley (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, alright. Thanks a lot! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• Alright, thanks a lot. (To be honest I'm surprised that the song is only mentioned in four articles here... the lyrics are quite nice, and Peelennium sounds like it compiled some very notable songs) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Koala check

Thank you for your spotcheck. Is the review done. I don't see a cross out at the FA:Talk. LittleJerry (talk) 23:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, not quite with you. I think I have indicated that the source review and spot-checks are done. What is it you want crossed out? Happy to oblige, but not sure. ?Tim riley (talk) 00:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Right here. See how Perseus (constellation)/archive1 is crossed out with a statement that its finished? Thank you. LittleJerry (talk) 01:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I see! So sorry. Now done. Am doing the Sega one today and will not forget to cross it out afterwards. Tim riley (talk) 08:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. LittleJerry (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Peer review

Mr Pooter awaits your kind attention. Brianboulton (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

British Library materials

Hi Tim. Ssilvers told me to send you a message. I need an item from the BL, but they are currently undergoing some sort of electronic ... well, I don't know WHAT it's called, but I will be unable to order a copy from their website because of their system changing. But if someone could retrieve it for me, the problem would be eliminated. I wonder if you might do it for me? Shouldn't be too difficult or costly. Write me please? Slfarrell (talk) 20:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I've emailed as requested. On the face of it I think I can be of use. Tim riley (talk) 20:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

UDI

Hi Tim, this is just a quick note to let you know that the Rhodesian UDI article is now at FAC. I would be delighted to know your opinion if you are interested. The link is here if you want to take a look. Thanks again and I hope you are well. —Cliftonian (talk) 07:30, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Delighted. I remember it well. I'll get to it a.s.a.p., but first I have to finish PR-ing the Great North of Scotland Railway and then The Diary of a Nobody. After Rhodesia I have promised to look at an article on a composer of whom I have never even heard! Let nobody say editing Wikipedia is monotonous! Tim riley (talk) 12:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

It's no rush at all, I just wanted to let you know. I may pop in at Pooter as well, he was a childhood favourite. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Pooter's bath

In my first draft of the synopsis I mentioned the bath incident. However, that version was far too long, so I cut a lot of incidents out. I have just added back a couple of lines on the bath, though I'm not yet convinced this is the right thing to do. It opens up the possibility that others will graft on their own favourite incidents, and in no time the synopsis will be bloated and unbalanced again. Perhaps you'd let me know your thoughts? Brianboulton (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

It was not an entirely serious complaint. Your synopsis is just right, and you are alas correct that if once you open the door you'll have all the Pooter fans adding their own favourite bits. Tim riley (talk) 23:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Britten works

One by one: Mont Juic (suite) DYK? (not by me) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Ought I to be adding support somewhere? I'm all at sea in the DYK nomination process. Tim riley (talk) 10:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

No no, it appeared yesterday, see article talk, comes with an interesting lecture on microformats I will have to digest myself ;) - I miss this introduction, quote: "tell me as gently as you can where you think I screwed up. I certainly wouldn't have done it mischievously or maliciously, and it's always good to learn something new." (Interesting exchange on accessibility further below.)

"Interesting" is not the adjective I'd choose. "Irritating" perhaps. If these loathsome excrescences served any indispensable function they would long since have been made compulsory for all articles. Happily they haven't, and I see no consensus in favour of polluting articles on grown-up music with them. Equally happily you and I can agree to differ on this while respecting the other. O si sic omnes! Tim riley (talk) 11:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I respect and others with whom I disagree on infoboxes. We agree that they should not be "mandatory". This is a free project, we volunteer, that excludes any "mandatory" (other than verifiable). Did you notice that an attempt was made (not by me) to have a template "infobox Bruckner symphony"? It failed because they are musical compositions like others, they don't need a special. Do you think Symphony No. 1 (Bruckner) is "polluted"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

So glad we can discuss so amicably. By the way, I have taken your name in vain below, but I don't think you will object. Ladies, of course, are not required to bring a bottle. Tim riley (talk) 12:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

More Paris

I'm still getting people attacking me and saying things like "the earlier version was better". Seems the more work you put into something the more people complain and the less grateful they are!Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 10:13, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

People get so territorial about articles to which they've contributed or on which they have Strong Views! I perfectly understand this, and have to be on my guard against falling into the same sin myself. My method, such as it is, is to keep reminding myself, "It's not what you want to write that matters, but what is helpful to the reader." But in some articles the army of occupation is armed to the teeth. Two articles that cry out for improvement are Herbert von Karajan and P. G. Wodehouse, but I know enough to come in out of the rain and I steer well clear. Here be dragons.

As for Paris, one could fairly argue that your arrangement by arrondissement is not the only way, but it's as good as any other and better than most, me judice. You and your colleagues manifestly improved the article when you brought it GA. Incidentally, do I remember correctly that one of the Parisian owners was moaning about the London article too? Perhaps we should put that on our list (though I haven't looked at it before writing this, and may be quite wrong.)

Have you looked in at w.i.p. on Falstaff? Interested in your thoughts. Gerda is interested in the subject too, and I have invited her to the party. Bring a bottle of sack. – Tim riley (talk) 10:44, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I've tried to cut it down, just tired of the OWNers complaining about it! Having a break at the moment, will look at Falstaff and Indonesian cinema what I return.Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 10:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Falstaff (Elgar) may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "[]"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) 16:13, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Walton

I noticed you removed a section about his church music that I added to the Walton article recently, saying that it needed citations, but the claim in what was then the next paragraph that "One of the best-known and most frequently performed of Walton's works is the cantata Belshazzar's Feast" isn't cited either. Not every fact has a citation to support it. I'm not about to go and do a survey of cathedral music lists and concert hall programmes to establish my claim, but it seems an eminently reasonable claim to make. Even if you disagreed with it, couldn't the paragraph just have been edited slightly to allow his church music to be at least mentioned in the article? Belshazzar's Feast, although famous, surely gets nothing like the number of performances of his small sacred works, which are sung week in week out in the cathedrals, churches, and college chapels of this country. DTOx (talk) 09:53, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Falstaff-Leslie.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:Falstaff-Leslie.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Nonsense! Be off, wretched bot! Tim riley (talk) 15:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Son of Paris

Hello,

I'm one of the 'steward' editors of the Paris article, and am just getting up to date on the many changes made there over the past month. For a bit of background: I was one of a few contributors working to improve the article from 2007~2010, and once my work done, I've only been checking up on the article once or twice a month. When I checked in around a week ago, I discovered that the article had been entirely rewritten over a two-week period, and not in a good way - it reads like a tourist guide article today, and it is organised around administrative districts that have nothing to do with the city's distinct 'quarters' that in some cases span several districts. In short, although well intentioned, the 'lone rewriter' is lacking in his knowledge of this city, thus doesn't provide the proper context for article content - this is wrong.

I realise that you have worked together to bring the article to GA status, and would like to preserve that status and even bring it up to FA status if possible. Could you give us a brief outline of the technical 'GA good' points about the article, perhaps on the Paris talk page?

Thanks so much for your help, THEPROMENADER 08:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

For GA criteria see here: Wikipedia:Good article criteria. As shown on the GAN page, I judged the criteria to have been met. Tim riley (talk) 13:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Importance of Being Earnest 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• , ''The Times'', 2 December 1909, p. 12</ref> the revival ran for 316 performances.<ref name=ga>[Wearing, J P. [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/30370 "Alexander, Sir George (1858–1918)"],

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Since you asked...

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Old Church of St Nidan, Llanidan/archive1. Hope you're enjoying the summer. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 14:03, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Bramshill House

Hi, remembering your architectural interest in Burges and others, I was wondering if you'd be able to review this important Jacobean house for GA. If not, no worries, but it could use somebody with sharp eyes such as yourself to review it!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:43, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Will do. I've just been architecturing at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Old Church of St Nidan, Llanidan/archive1 which you may like to look in at. Tim riley (talk) 15:07, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll look at that and the one Charlotte has at FAC tomorrow!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

That Diary

I've been delaying the diary's FAC nomination because of the current overcrowding there, but it doesn't look like easing off, so I've gone ahead and nommed it: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Diary of a Nobody/archive1. I'd be grateful for any comments, if you're around (and if the Doctor feels like taking a punt, so much the better). Brianboulton (talk) 19:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Wow another one! Sure, I'll add it to the other two I'll try to look at tomorrow.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Britten clip

There is a nice video clip of Britten rehearsing a combined choir and orchestra at Aldeburgh in 1967 on the BBC here which I thought you and any talk page stalkers might enjoy. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:58, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Alas! It isn't accessible to UK users. I imagine it's on the BBC's domestic website somewhere and will fossick. Be that as it may, thank you so much, yet again! Tim riley (talk) 09:07, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

It is in the Culture section, dated 2 May 2013, and the title (for Yanks at least) is "Behind the scenes with Benjamin Britten in Aldeburgh". I like his style as a director. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:29, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Dresden Triptych

Hi. This passed this morning, in no small part thanks to your input. I wanted to say thanks for giving us so much help and encouragment. I found your review to be very rewarding; I'm much more pleased with how the page turned out since. Ceoil (talk) 16:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

What a nice message to get – thank you so much! Glad to have been of passing help, and am really pleased to see the article promoted to a thoroughly-merited FA. Tim riley (talk) 11:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Tim for all your help and for your careful reviews. Very much appreciated. I'm sorry I've never reciprocated but happy I had a chance to get to know you. You're a gentleman, kind and polite, and an asset to Wikipedia. Victoria (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I say! That's very kind indeed, and will be extraordinarily difficult to live up to, but I shall try. Tim riley (talk) 21:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

"Sources" in _The Importance of Being Earnest_ article

Hello Mr Riley,

Thanks for all your recent hard work on the The Importance of Being Earnest article. I've noticed you add a great number of works to the "Sources" list though few of them appear to be cited in the article. Would they not fit better in a "Further Reading" section.. Best wishes, --Ktlynch (talk) 13:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

[Note: discussion continued on Ktlynch's page, with a view to possible FAC. Tim riley (talk) 17:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)]

Copyedit/comment request

I know you are a busy man, but if you can find the time I would greatly appreciate a few edits/comments at Ringo Starr, currently at FAC. Cheers! GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi. You're invited to participate in a peer review for the Mughal-e-Azam article at Wikipedia:Peer review/Mughal-e-Azam/archive1. I hope that constructive input from several people can better prepare it for FAC. It probably needs several pairs of eyes who don't know much about Indian film to comment on as much as it needs experts to comment..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Spot checks

Hi Tim, Have I seen you doing spot checks at FAC before? If you have, would you be able to venture into the modern and profane world of popular Eurodance music at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/S&M (song)/archive10? If the very thought of going through it leaves you cold, or if you're just too busy on other bits, do you know of anyone who is particularly good at spot-checking? It's the final hurdle for this article at its tenth (yes, tenth) appearance at FAC. Many thanks - SchroCat (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You have indeed seen spot checks by me, sometimes into things that I know absolutely nothing about. (Astronomy anyone? Or American copyright law?) Happy to do this one, and pleased to see it's all online stuff, as I've been at the British Library all morning and am in no especial rush to return. Tim riley (talk) 15:57, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Fatinitza

Hey, Tim, would you be willing to do the GA review on this opera? I want a tough, but fair, review. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Very pleased to do so. Quid pro quo: I have PR'd James Clerk Maxwell which is now also up for GA. Might you be willing to do the necessary? I'd do it myself, but I think my PR contributions may rule me out. Tim riley (talk) 20:12, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure. My dad talked about Maxwell all the time when I was growing up, and there's now a huge statue of him a couple miles from me. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 20:17, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Question

Curious. Any chance you could get a scan of Satan's Harvest Home at the British Library? Or a photograph? Assuming, of course, it's on display and they allow photography or would be willing to work with us.

BTW, I found myself doing my first stage play GA just last week (no opera, but the Indonesians didn't really have operas): Allah jang Palsoe. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll see what the British Library can offer me. Getting copies of pages of ordinary books, even old ones, is usually possible, and we'll see whether they can oblige with this. I'll investigate next week and report back. – Tim riley (talk) 11:10, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot. Noticed there's nothing online, and such an article (which I came across while... reading about Dutch painters... somehow) would certainly benefit from at least a title page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:25, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Sibelius's Eighth Symphony

As you've probably realised, I have a weakness for lost, destroyed or non-existent works of art. I've been in London this past week, away from my Tippett library, so I've been amusing myself researching Sibelius's lost eighth. I have now sent the results of my labours for peer review; any comment you care to make would be most welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 19:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

With the utmost pleasure. I know hardly anything of this, and look forward to learning. The most important composition since Britten and Shostakovich died was, meseems, Elgar's Third, courtesy of the superb Anthony Payne – so unfinished masterpieces are all right with me. More anon. Tim riley (talk) 19:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Great North of Scotland Railway

Thanks for the peer review a few weeks ago. I'm back and I've nominated the article at FAC here. Edgepedia (talk) 05:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Madame Sans-Gêne (play), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Verneuil and Knickerbocker Theatre (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) 11:14, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Kellie Loder

Hi Tim,

I know we've never interacted on Wikipedia before, but I was wondering if you would consider reviewing my current FAC for the Kellie Loder article. I noticed that you reviewed the Ringo Starr FAC and thought you might be interested in this FAC as well. Any constructive comments you would be willing to provide at the corresponding discussion would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 21:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tim,

I really appreciate you reviewing this article. I believe I have addressed your concerns. Please let me know if I have not or if you have any further ones.

Neelix (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Now added my support. One of the joys of Wikipedia is being surprised by excellent articles about subjects one knows nothing about. Rather to my surprise I enjoyed this one very much. Bravo! Tim riley (talk) 15:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

ILN Artists

Despite a recent difference of opinion, I am going to assume good faith, and would like to pass on a link that may be of use to you.

You recently uploaded some scans of Illustrated London News drawings,

I Found this on a very quick search, http://www.artbiogs.co.uk/2/organizations/illustrated-london-news which is a set of biographies for various British artists, It might help provide additional clues as to possible artists for ILN drawings. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:53, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

In relation to concerns about images

OK, Not my best response. I've taken your concern on-board. Are there any specfic images you'd like me to review a third time?Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

By no means! After such a gracious reply I'll do my own fine tuning. Thank you again for your generous response to my original tetchy point, and permit me to say that such a colleaguely approach as yours shows what makes Wikipedia work so well. Tim riley (talk) 16:48, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

That symphony

Pray observe that Symphony No. 8 (Sibelius) has been nominated at FAC and awaits its fate there. (Someone needs to wipe that grin off Sibelius's face). Brianboulton (talk) 21:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Rhodies in WW1

Hi Tim, I hope you are well. This is just a note to let you know that the Southern Rhodesian involvement in World War I article is now at FAC. The FAC is here. If you're interested and find yourself at a loose end, your thoughts would as always be very welcome. —Cliftonian (talk) 03:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I have a longish train journey tomorrow, and have printed out the article to scrutinise while in transit. More from me from the Lake District later this week. Tim riley (talk) 19:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much Tim! Have a pleasant trip. —Cliftonian (talk) 04:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:James Clerk Maxwell/GA1

Having recovered sufficiently from the Edinburgh Festival, I've done the first analysis. Conclusion was, unfortunately, that it wasn't quite there, but it's not that far off. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 15:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Heigh ho! A pity, but one must of course speak as one finds. My ignorance of the subject is pretty well comprehensive, so I shan't be demurring. Tim riley (talk) 19:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

NPG

Thanks, Tim. I had to take it rather craftily as they don't like cameras in there, as you know! Jack1956 (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Full stops for every book page note

Hi Tim. As I can't see anything in the guidelines about it but am pretty sure the norm on here is to not add a full stop after every book citation do you have any idea if it is advised to not include them? Just I notice that most articles, including yours, Brian's (and mine), avoid using full stops after every book note. I brought it up at Talk:This Guitar (Can't Keep from Crying)/GA1 and while it's probably not something which should prevent an article passing GA I'd appreciate it if you could offer an insight into this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:00, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I don't use them either. But I come from the school of Riley and copy adopt his method. -- Cassianto^Talk 21:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I too have rummaged in the Manual of Style and found nothing useful one way or the other. (Department of No Surprise.) I use the {{cite book}} template for lists of books, and that certainly doesn't add a closing full stop, but as so often in Wikipedia it seems to be a matter on which the original author of the article is wholly at liberty to decide according to personal preference. – Tim riley (talk) 08:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Ein Hero What The?

Good to hear from you and thanks for the heads-up on Ein Heldeleben, about which I gave my two cents on the talk page. I've started work on an article on the Michael Tippett piano concerto as an adjunct to Brian's revamp on the main article on the composer. Should you have any suggestions on sources or anything else, please feel free. The article itself is still just a stub currently but plan to plunge in depth once my sources are in better order. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 17:41, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Britten and Pears (or something like that)

This might amuse you. While toiling away on the Tippett article, I was reminded that a few years ago I was idly listening to Radio 3 when a performance of The Heart's Assurance, Tippett's song cycle for tenor and piano was announced. The announcer gave a short introduction to the work which, she said, was first performed at the Wigmore Hall in 1953 by Britten and Pears. What I heard, however, was that it was first performed at the Wigmore Hall in 1953 by "Britney Spears". Now, were one a time traveller, wouldn't that be a premiere worth going to! Brianboulton (talk) 20:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I believe Paris Hilton will perform Delius's Song of a Great City at the same concert. Michael Coveney, talking on Radio 4 about the days of overnight theatre reviews, told of Philip Hope-Wallace telephoning in his review of a Purcell first night at Glyndebourne, duly transcribed by the copy-taker to report Janet Baker's superb rendition of When I am Laid Enough. Tim riley (talk) 17:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Notes

My point during that review was if we're actually using summary style and all the facts are clear there is no need for any notes, and a FA article doesn't require notes to be promoted. Notes seem to come up for a few reasons. A fact in the article is challenged and to clarify during in the review process you add a note to explain to get support. You might be writing and realize that 3 sources say X but 1 says Y and 1 says 'X and Y are wrong, Z' and you decide to add a note in advance of being challenged after choosing to put X in the article. There's also the 'not central to the narrative' type of notes you mentioned. #1 is usually ok. #2 is sometimes ok, although no one reads notes and historians who can't agree about basic facts isn't really that interesting to read most of the time....see WP:SS. The 'not central' type notes I think are not good practice since if we're observing summary style its either in the article or in another article, or omitted. Also, #1 tend to be short sentences or even just a couple of words. #2 can get kind of long, #3 seem to be a whole paragraph with multiple citations and I always wonder with the interesting asides why this isn't in the article! If you have an article you want me to review let me know I'd be happy to help. Kirk (talk) 22:49, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Could you remind me which review we are considering, please? I'm floundering slightly. Tim riley (talk) 07:35, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Peasants Revolt & Southern Rhodesia in World War I

Oh. I don't remember any particular problem with references at either of them. As long as all important statements are sourced and cited I shouldn't expect any problem at FAC. Tim riley (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

"Trying" Patience

Hello Tim, just to say thank you for your timely intervention. I was just writing a reasoned reply to Ssilvers (a) many people refer by default to Lady Jane's "double bass", as Google confirms, so I think some clarification at least seems justified; b) it's all in a footnote, after all!), but I guess, since the addition stands and you've intervened, keeping my own counsel is a more gracious option. Anyway thank you matron, you made me smile! Alfietucker (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Ssilvers, my splendid WP guide, philosopher and friend is my constant Wikicolleague but we can still disagree now and then. You are both hereby sent to bed without your suppers. I have spoken. Tim riley (talk) 17:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

:-D All right, matron! Alfietucker (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Disraeli

Sure, I'll look at it tomorrow, Tuesday at latest. You might be interested in reviewing Amir Hamzah, if you can't do it at the moment you could review at a later date and reserve the review. It needs a good reviewer as in my opinion it has FA potential.. If not, no worries..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for asking me, I shall peruse it tomorrow. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

L'Arianna

I am waking this sleeper up. As an experiment I have (temporarily) added one of the Opera project's optional boxes to the article (I was not hassled about this in any way, it's my own idea). I should be very glad to have your plain opinion as to whether this (a)improves the article, (b) makes it worse or (c) makes no difference. Together with any other wise words you may wish to impart. Brianboulton (talk) 22:59, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Have replied on Brian's talk page. Tim riley (talk) 09:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Amir Hamzah

Amir Hamzah duly reviewed. And promoted in short order. A top-notch article. Tim riley (talk) 15:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Wow that was quick, thanks! Sorry for the delay with the Disraeli article, I'll definitely get to it by the end of the week! Yes, I think Hamzah has FA potential, although I believe Crisco is still rather critical of it. I was wondering if you think Fatimid architecture would stand a chance at FAC? It is is pretty comprehensive. Might need a bit of a polish.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I find that a tricky one to answer. Knowing bugger all (a technical term) about the subject I can't guess if there is nothing/something/tons more to say on the subject. What the article says it says very well, but is it substantial enough? I just can't say. Tim riley (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes that's my feeling on it that neither Aymatth or myself are experts and we both know that articles can appear to be very good and of FA quality but when looked at by an expert on the subject can seem grossly deficient. All I know is that it was written based on what we consider to be reliable sources so should generally be OK, just as you say, there is always that doubt that it's substantial enough without an expert on Middle eastern architecture providing some feedback. It might be worth a shot anyway. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:56, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Why not do a peer review asking the specific question as to whether reviewers think that the sources listed cover all of the most important sources on the topic? Also ask the question on the talk pages of the relevant projects. If you find out that you have consulted all the key sources, you can be more confident, and if you find out not, then you know what needs to be done. When did the style fall into abeyance, and why? Did it inspire any later styles? Was there ever a Fatimid revival? -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep it in mind. Sorry for the delay on the Disraeli front Tim, really not been feeling much like wiki of late. I'll definitely resume tomorrow!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:53, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

OK. Well it would only be nitpicking anyway, it's a superb article and am sure will pass FA with little trouble. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:50, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Elgin Cathedral FAC

Hi Tim, not sure if you saw my comment at the review but as the nominator is new to FAC I'd like to see a spotcheck of sources and since most are apparently in book form, I thought of you... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:49, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Reporting back soonest on FAC page. Tim riley (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

And now done. Tim riley (talk) 12:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Many tks as always, Tim. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

GAN Robert Lowell

I offered a brief second opinion on general policy vis-à-vis citation/criteria 2 compliance, I'll take a closer look later on specifics and to see if there are other things needing remedy. I do agree, prima facie, with your assessment and interpretation. Please keep me updated. --ColonelHenry (talk) 15:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

• I don't know what your stance is on the article, or the nominator's desire to revise it (i.e. the protests of "I don't have the time"), but I wouldn't pass it for based on criteria 1, 2, and 3 issues that I don't think are solveable in the near future. The prose isn't clear and concise, there's a lot of nice-review fluff ("wide acclaim", etc.), lack of worthwhile scholarly discussion of Lowell's work in terms of themes, symbolism, and its place in 1950s/1960s American letters and the confessional movement, and the citations are a mess. If I were reviewing it, I'd fail it as it stands with more than a few comments on improvement. Good luck with the rest of the review. Keep me updated.--ColonelHenry (talk) 19:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Little Tich at peer review

Hello Tim, hope your well. Just a quick note to let you know of the listing of Little Tich at peer review. I would love for you to take part if you're able to. Many thanks! -- Cassianto^Talk 08:52, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

It will be my privilege and pleasure. A bit busy IRL tomorrow, but should be able to spread myself at the weekend, and much looking forward to it. Tim riley (talk) 22:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

A possible boost for Ben

You may like to visit this page, where I am nominating Ben as a "vital" composer (probably in place of Satie). Brianboulton (talk) 16:11, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

An award for you

Our motto: "It's only hard if you make it hard"		The PENISS Prize
		On behalf of the People Encouraging Niceness/Eschewing Nastinesss in Society Society, I hereby award you the PENISS Prize. The prize is the highest (and sole) honour in the gift of the Society and is awarded irregularly, on merit. It entitles the awardee to the postnominal letters P.E.N.I.S.S. (in appropriate contexts, of course). It confers automatic membership of the Society, and it thus bestows the power to award the prize to others, and they to others, in perpetuity. . Remember, the more PENISSes in the world, the better for all of us. What a nice thought. Please continue your good work!

To present this award to others, simply type {{subst:User:JackofOz/PENISS}} on their talk page. Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

You dear, bloody idiot, Jack! Thank you so much (I think). Tim riley (talk) 21:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:David-mediterranean.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:David-mediterranean.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Image was deleted in error from Elizabeth David bibliography by an editor who mistakenly thought the article was a list. Image now restored to article. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Elizabeth-david-frenc-country-cooking-cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Elizabeth-david-frenc-country-cooking-cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Image was deleted in error from Elizabeth David bibliography by an editor who mistakenly thought the article was a list. Image now restored to article. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Elizabeth David Is There a Nutmeg in the House PB Oct 2001 014029290X.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Elizabeth David Is There a Nutmeg in the House PB Oct 2001 014029290X.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Image was deleted in error from Elizabeth David bibliography by an editor who mistakenly thought the article was a list. Image now restored to article. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Italian-Food E-David.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Italian-Food E-David.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Image was deleted in error from Elizabeth David bibliography by an editor who mistakenly thought the article was a list. Image now restored to article. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:French prov.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:French prov.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Image was deleted in error from Elizabeth David bibliography by an editor who mistakenly thought the article was a list. Image now restored to article. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Omelette and GW.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Omelette and GW.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Image was deleted in error from Elizabeth David bibliography by an editor who mistakenly thought the article was a list. Image now restored to article. – Tim riley (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Elizabeth David bibliography, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Replied on this editor's talk page. Tim riley (talk) 11:33, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Advice needed for Britten article

Tim Riley, I sent an email with the content below to Martinevans asking for advice. The same material is also on my talk page. Martin suggested that you are the one of the major contributors to the Benjamin Britten article and should be contacted. He also explained how to contact you other than send an email. I will appreciate your advice. (arno, aka Glencliffe) --Glencliffe (talk) 18:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Note to Tim riley, Martinevans and Ruhrfisch:

I will greatly appreciate your advice about what I have gathered below - whether I am on the correct track and whether it is useful. Regarding the existing Wikipedia information about the "School" - there is no article about the school but many references in various articles as well as the redirect page.

(Wikipedia article title) (Benjamin Britten) No mention of the school in the Benjamin Britten article. Britten died shortly after hearing the first master classes that were the beginnings of the school. (Peter Pears) - no mention in Wikipedia article. (Aldeburgh Festival): "In addition to the annual Festival, Aldeburgh Music also runs the Britten-Pears Young Artist Programme (formerly the Britten-Pears School for Advanced Musical Studies)". (Nancy Evans): "Evans taught singing at the Britten-Pears School in Snape Maltings". (Britten-Pears Orchestra): "Since the very first course in 1972, over 10,000 young artists have attended what started as the Britten–Pears School for Advanced Musical Studies, and is now called the Britten–Pears Young Artist Programme. The programme aims to bridge the gap between conservatoires and professional life, offering unique development and performance opportunities to young musicians. Many have gone on to become leading musicians in their own right."

I think that, rather than an article about the school, some information could be added to the Britten article (at least a reference and link) and more comments could be added to the Pears article. My contribution might be the comments below and the picture of Eric Crozier with his wife Nancy Evans and my wife [she needs to be edited out] as there is no picture of him and a very early picture of Nancy Evans in the Wikipedia article. My picture is probably the last picture taken of Crozier, only a few weeks before his death (http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=eric%20crozier). I will gladly make this photo available, but would need someone skilled to edit out my wife. I don't know where or how to add to the Britten or Pears articles. I also suggest that the recent publication listed below (Making Musicians, by Moira Bennett), be included in the Britten and/or Pears bibliography. A personal note - my wife taught at the school from 1990 to 2005, during which time I spent a good deal of time in the Britten-Pears library (adjacent to the Red House) as well as time in Aldeburgh and with the students and teachers at the school. The Bennett book is a history about the school from its earliest beginnings to approximately 2011 with numerous (b&w) photographs.

"'One day in 1953 he [Britten] said: 'What you and Peter and I have got to remember is that we're going to have a music school here one day.' The 'school' came to birth in 1973 with a Snape Maltings weekend for singers directed by Peter Pears, and it has gone on growing ever since." (1) Quotation from Chapter 2, Imogen Holst, p. 50.

"Britten was speaking only five years after the establishment of the Aldeburgh Festival." (2) Bennett, p. 21.

The Britten-Pears School for Advanced Musical Studies (http://www.brittenpears.org/page.php?pageid=625) was opened by Queen Elizabeth on 28 April 1979 (2)Bennett, p.83. It is now the Britten-Pears Young Artist Programme (http://www.aldeburgh.co.uk/bpp).

The School was important to Britten, and also to Peter Pears, who gave the first masterclasses in 1972. [Imogen Holst incorrectly gives the year of the first master classes as 1973] (3)

After the school building was opened…"Pears was in charge of the singers' master classes, held at various times during the year with Nancy Evans as his co-director of singing studies, and many other instrumentalists and singers - among them, Galina Vishnevskaya - who had worked with Britten came to teach." (4) p. 588-589.

Sources for above information: (1) The Britten Companion, edited by Christopher Palmer. Faber & Faber. London, U.K. © (1984). ISBN 0-571-13168-9 Pbk

( 2, 3) Making Musicians A Personal History of the Britten-Pears School. Moira Bennett. The Bittern Press, Woodbridge, Suffolk �© (2012). ISBN: 978-0-9571672-0-9.

(4) Benjamin Britten A Biography. Humphrey Carpenter. Faber & Faber Limited, London, U.K., © (1992). ISBN: 0-571-14324-5.

Existing Wikipedia articles: (Benjamin Britten) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Britten (Peter Pears) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Pears (Aldeburgh Festival) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldeburgh_Festival

Relevant websites (About Aldeburgh Music) http://www.aldeburgh.co.uk/about_us (Britten-Pears Foundation) http://www.brittenpears.org/index.php

--Glencliffe (talk) 19:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)--Glencliffe (talk) 18:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

PR Request

Greetings, Tim Riley. I would be much obliged if you could take the time to return to Amir Hamzah for the peer review here. The article has been expanded a bit since your last visit, but not dramatically so. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Delighted to do so (and rather flattered to be asked!) It will be my privilege and pleasure to look in, probably tomorrow. Tim riley (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot! (BTW, I've weighed in a bit on Disraeli). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
  • A bit! You've added lots of top-notch comment on Disraeli, for which many thanks. Tim riley (talk) 20:40, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Elgin Cathedral

Many thanks for your kind words and also your checks at the British Library (which I had the pleasure of visiting last week). The process was less daunting than I expected so I may try putting a few other articles I've been the main contributor to up for candidature. It took Aunva6 to take it in hand and do much of the required review improvements and I am grateful to him. Thanks again. --Bill Reid | (talk) 08:48, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For an excellent article on Disraeli – one of a large number you should have received a barnstar for. Thanks for the very enjoyable read. – SchroCat (talk) 09:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

How very kind! It's been a good morning, what with this pleasing addition and Dizzy's promotion to FA. Tim riley (talk) 11:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Congrats, no sooner had the peer review finished and it is promoted to FA!! Sorry I didn't have time to cast my support!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh drat! Did I forget this too!? I had a tiny distraction which I ended up becoming too engrossed in. It looks like you didn't need it anyway, but for the record Support! -- Cassianto^Talk 12:23, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

These kind comments are all greatly appreciated. Wehwalt and I put a lot into the article and it's good to see it safely through FAC. Tim riley (talk) 12:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

L'Arianna

For better, for worse, I've nominated it at FAC. Obviously I hope for the better. Brianboulton (talk) 20:50, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. Shall look in and banish all personal thoughts before commenting. Tim riley (talk) 22:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

PS: There have been few laughs in my Tippett studies, but I've just spotted, and regretfully corrected, a typo referring to his (presumably family-friendly) oratorio A Child of Our Tim. Brianboulton (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

(After picking myself up off the floor). Kindly make sure there's no more libellous talk like that. As a fully paid-up bachelor I DENY EVERYTHING. Writs will be issued as necessary. Tim riley (talk) 20:03, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

reverted edit of Graham Payn

Thankyou for your work on the article, notably the supplying of refs on April 14, 2009. Would you object to having the url "Obituary of Graham Payn" in the reference, as within the remit of WP:CITEVAR? I thought being able to read the ref was useful, especially as there is more there than is used in the wikipedia article, that may assist future editors. Also, do you object to having "Retrieved 26 September 2013", which could help in the event of the link dying? (unlikely in the case of The Daily Telegraph)--DadaNeem (talk) 23:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Singularly dyspeptic of me – apologies! Don't in truth mind all that much as long the reader sees a consistent layout and phrasing - e.g. no mix of "retrieved [date]" and "accessed [date]". Best wishes, Tim riley (talk) 17:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Kellie Loder

Hi Tim,

The Kellie Loder FAC was successful! Thank you for participating in that conversation. I have nominated the article to go up on the main page here. Any constructive comments you would be willing to provide there would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 17:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Gamal Abdel Nasser

Hullo Tim, hope you're well. I have a somewhat-left-field spotcheck request for you this time, namely a Military History Project A-Class Review. I know I generally ask you for these things at FAC but that's the stated destination for this article and I think it'd be great to get a spotcheck out of the way beforehand. I'm keen on that especially because I've copyedited and reviewed the article in my capacity as a MilHist member, and found it generally very good, but not being an expert on Nasser or modern Egyptian history I'd feel more comfortable about fully endorsing if someone like yourself could give it a more thorough spotcheck than mine (which did in fact reveal a couple of things needing attention). Now I know you're probably not a MilHist member but I'm sure no-one there would have an issue with you joining in, particularly given your experience with political biography. Anyway, no pressure, just if you're interested and have time...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd love to help but for family reasons I'm marooned 300 miles from the British Library and can't guess when I'll be able to return to London. It could be weeks. Most of the references in the Nasser article are to books, so a check of online resources wouldn't be any use to you. The best I can say is that if nobody else has done a spot-check before I get back home I'll be pleased to do it. Best. Tim riley (talk) 14:54, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Performances of Noye's Fludde

Hi Tim, you might be able to think of a way to steer the Ark between Scylla and Charybdis (to mix my myths) at Talk:Noye's Fludde#Performance history, although there is absolutely no rush and you may not have anything of use in your books (even when you're reunited with them). Best wishes, Bencherlite^Talk 15:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Aha! Jason and the Arkonauts. I'll be honoured to look in and add what I can. Tim riley (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Falstaff

Many thanks for your note about the opera, and appreciate your thoughts abut how we might somehow combine the best elements. I worked on it extensively for a class I was giving to an adult ed. group in town which, towards the end, focused on Verdi's relationship with Boito. (Additionally, I did work on Otello and Simon Boccanegra (plus almost every other Verdi article for that matter since the Spring!!)

Anyway, at a quick glance, you appear to have more on the comparison with the plays, which is good. I found some good stuff in Phillips-Matz as well as Frank Walker on the working relationship (since my class also focused on Verdi's relationships with his key librettists, Cammarano and then Piave).

Here's the situation: I leave tomorrow for Italy for the whole of October, and arrive in London on 30th, staying there till 14th. I was going to drop you a line anyway after your suggestion to meet up at Covent Garden for a beer some time ago now, and I don't expect to be able to do very much before month's end. But let me know if you have some merge ideas, and I'll check them at various points. I'll be in Busseto on 10 October, of course!! All the best, Viva-Verdi (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

D'Oyly Carte Opera Company

Just would like a little more detail on why my entry to the page was trivia (or is it trivial). I'm treading carefully since I've only edited a few pages. It seems to me to be no more a piece of trivia (or trivial) than the television references, especially since it is associated with an historically significant recording. Since you are my senior in these matters I am willing defer to your judgment, but it would be helpful to know the criteria you used so I do not repeat the error. RMoribayashi (talk) 05:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that very nice note. To begin at the beginning I hadn't realised you were new to Wikipedia, and I send you a very warm welcome. We have a rule here, Please do not bite the newcomers, which I have inadvertently broken, and I hope you will accept my apologies. As to what is and what isn't trivia, opinions vary. I take the view that one should look at it this way: in an article of a few thousand words (at most) is the information central to the narrative one is trying to pack in? Other long-serving editors take a less austere view. I am asking my valued colleague and friend Ssilvers to comment on your addition, as he and I sometimes arm-wrestle over what is or is not trivia in articles. I shall defer to his judgment in this case. Meanwhile I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia, and if I can be of any help please don't hesitate to leave a note on my talk page. Best wishes, Tim riley (talk) 14:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, RMoribayashi. The album that you mentioned apparently contains only a "passing mention" of D'Oyly Carte. If it had a song *about* the opera company, that would be far more significant. Or if Rolling Stone magazine were to write an article that says that the mention of the opera company in "The Song of the Viking" was of particular significance, that would, perhaps, be worth quoting. I agree with you that the television references were similarly fleeting, and so I have just removed them. In these popular culture sections, it is better to include only examples where the topic has had a more significant impact on popular media or culture. As Tim says, he and I set the bar slightly differently – he would delete most of the pop culture references. But we can at least agree that mere passing mentions that are not commented upon by reviewers do not add much to the encyclopedia article. Let me add my welcome to Wikipedia, and let us know if you need any help with anything, as Tim and I may be able to assist you. If you are interested in music, I would note that song titles should go in "quotes", while the names of albums should be in italics. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the warm welcome, I will try to do it justice. Your response clears up much. I was following the lead of other pages which are apparently not as well looked after. Wile Todd did go on to record a version of a song from Iolanthe and through that brought the music of G&S to many of his fans, this was his only direct reference to the D'Oyly Carte company. Incidentally, I found this page trying to find the D'Oyly Carte touring history to verify the dates I saw them on Broadway in 1976. Would a history of their world tours be a valid addition to the page? I do have another question unrelated to this page that I could not find an answer to in the help pages. I hope this is an appropriate place to ask. I have made a few additions where I, in ignorance, misused the minor checkbox. I later found out that this is bad form and would like to correct my error. Is it possible to clean up what I have done without disturbing later additions. In other words, is there any way to remove the "M" from a contribution? RMoribayashi (talk) 22:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Most of the American tours are already mentioned in the article. A history of the company's American (or all of their foreign) productions could be a separate article, I think. In the past, someone suggested an article about G&S productions in continental Europe (including DOC and other productions), which I think would make an interesting article, since the information is somewhat harder to find. Do not worry about "cleaning up" instances in which you checked the "minor" box. It's water under the bridge. Just use the box correctly going forward. You will make far more edits in the future than you have made in the past. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Ben and Michael

Tim, on my talkpage is a very nice note from Andrew Lowe Watson, the original author of the Tippett article which I am in the process of mangling. He has kind words to say about the Britten article, too. I thought you should read what he says. Brianboulton (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

How enormously pleasing! One feels so honoured at such approval from such a source. We have some wonderful colleagues in Wikipedia as well as the handful of the other sort. Thank you so much for pointing the note out. I am tempted to send ALW a message, but what you have already said on his talk page says it all. Pray let me know when Tippett is ready for the attentions of this captious critic. I am stranded in the Lake District for an unknown length of time and will relish any chance to make a nuisance of myself at PR by way of fending off cabin fever. Tim riley (talk) 13:59, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Progress on the Tippett saga is glacial and much interrupted, but I hope to have it peer-reviewable by early next week. I am off to Madeira for some late sunshine and rest on about 15th, an interlude much anticipated; I need a bit of a rest from this place. Note some important music TFAs looming: Bizet on 25 October, A Child of Our Time on 9 November (both these nominated), and Ben on 22 November. I don't know if there will be JFK-related competition for the 22nd; no relevant article immediately comes to mind from existing FAs. Neither the JFK article nor that on the assassination are anywhere near being FAs; not even Wehwalt himself could knock them into shape in time. Brianboulton (talk) 14:43, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Bon voyage, you lucky bugger! It must be getting on for twenty years since I was in Madeira, being pampered for a week at Reid's. I remember the whole island with great affection. Take stout walking boots if venturing up into the hills. Tim riley (talk) 14:55, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks (through teeth clenched enviously) to Wehwalt for the photograph. What a gorgeous spot! Tim riley (talk) 18:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Fishing, again

Afternoon, and I hope all is well in the lakes. If you're looking around for diversions while you are away from the metropolis, I've given "Die Forelle" a workover and put it up for GAN. I'm not entirely sure about the various foibles of GA's relating to classical songs and leids, so it's more than the nomination is more in hope than expectation. Could I ask for a visit to have a look over it? (Feel free to quick fail it if you think its a deserved fate)! Many thanks if you're able to spare the time – and no problems if you're not able to. All the best – SchroCat (talk) 14:14, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

When I know (i) nothing or (ii) a fair bit about a subject I'm happy reviewing GAs, but with "The Trout" (or any Lieder) I'm in an awkward no-man's-land where I know a bit but not enough to feel comfortable as a judge. May I propose this: if no-one else has begun a review of the article a fortnight hence I'll give it a go, but I am keeping my fingers crossed that a better reviewer will come forward. Failing that, pray prod me on 16th inst and I'll lumber into action. Best wishes, Tim riley (talk) 14:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Tim; if you're not comfortable with doing it, then its not a problem at all – I'll not hold you to it (Hopefully a talk page stalker may see this and be interested)! I'll try and do a Fauré mélodie next time, but the call of Schubert's songs is a strong one. All the best - SchroCat (talk) 16:25, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Steuart Wilson

I don't know if this is totally eccentric, but for some reason today it occurs to me that this article, which both you and I have done quite a bit of work on in the past, might be suitable for GA nomination. I confess I'm a total novice about this process, but thought it might a) be worthy; b) incidentally good preparation for me to see from the "other side" how such a process works before I get involved with helping with the Tippett FAC. So do you think SW is a realistic prospect for GA nomination? Alfietucker (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Well it's only a C class article at the moment, which I think is about right. It's 1,500 words as compared to Grove's 360 and the ODNB's 1,700, and so is plainly in serious competition with the two main rivals, in quantity at any rate, and the quality is all right too, meseems. But I think it would need some serious work at a library to get it up to GA standard. As a personal rule of thumb I don't feel that an article in the course of writing which I've never opened a book is thoroughly researched. My own contributions to the article, such as they were, were spin-offs from my (considerable) research for the Adrian Boult article.

Oddly, I haven't found that going in for GAN gives one much insight into FAC or vice versa. I find GAN rather unsatisfactory, depending as it does on one editor's views of any article. You can run across reviewers who interpret the GA criteria as FA-lite and others who (rightly, me judice) are quite a lot less stringent. (I know some people think I have been too lenient with some GANs I have passed.) At FAC, with many people wading in with views, the standard seems to me to be much more consistent. Such articles as I have taken to GAN have, on the whole, been through peer review first for that reason. – Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, I did open quite a few books for my contribution to Steuart - in fact it was my shocked discovery of his homophobia when reading Britten's diaries edited by Donald Mitchell which first provoked me to start adding to the article. (Not that LGBT rights is a hobby horse of mine: just that the industry I work in has many of that orientation, and I have considerable sympathy and sensitivity to their cause.) Then, when I had rather less to do late in 2011 I spent a fair bit of time out of idle curiosity filling in more, partly from books I had to hand (e.g. Michael Hurd's biography of Boughton) and partly through extensive and fairly intense internet searching. So, I guess, by that measure it might be worthy of a GAN. But perhaps I should go for peer review first. I'll look into that - or do you have any tips? Thank you for your time over this, btw. Alfietucker (talk) 21:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

As a successor to those frightful people who so terrorised Sir Steuart I am not his greatest fan, but his artistry as a singer can't be denied. Glad you're thinking in terms of peer review – the best way to go I think. A simple process, and curiously comfortable. Though in theory it's the same as FAC – open season with everyone shooting at you – it's done as it were en famille rather than under the bright lights of FAC. Comfortable and friendly, you know. Happy to set it up for you this time, if you want, though the process is not labyrinthine. I claim no proprietary interest in the page, and will gladly cede the GA gong to you if you steer it home. (PS: not only was he a horrid homophobe, he couldn't spell, either: "Steuart", forsooth!) Tim riley (talk) 21:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Can I ask a favor of you?

Hello, Tim riley, how have you been? I'm a Japanese Wikipedian who created Piano Concerto (Delius) before, with your great cooperation. Today I found that the article Symphony No. 3 (Raff) is composed of complete copy-paste from an external web site. This obviously violates copyright and needs to be deleted from Wikipedia right now. However, deletion procedure here seems different from Japanese one and it will take long time for me to fully understand the guideline and submit the deletion request. Would you kindly submit deletion request instead of me? You are the only English speaking Wikipedian who I had contact before and are currently active. Best regards, --Ponruy (talk) 11:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Replied on Ponruy's talk page and dealt with on article page and talk page. Tim riley (talk) 13:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your rapid response and action. Your instruction on Talk page of the Symphony is also great education for me. I will learn more to deal with this kind of problems.--Ponruy (talk) 14:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Stracciatella

Tim - In traditional Wikipedia style, please accept this gift of a triple (or quadruple?) whammy from across Italy [9]. By all means feel free to adjust the ingredients to suit the refinements of your impeccable taste (though take care with the sciusceddu...). Buon appetito! 86.162.136.32 (talk) 10:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Why do I have the strong feeling I know who this is from? How very nice, and thank you so much! Tim riley (talk) 11:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Prego, Tim! (Fwiw, perhaps my motto... Conscientious editors never die; they only change ip.) 86.162.136.32 (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I dare say. Mattina nebbiosa (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

E chi sarebbe? Seriously, thank you so very much for including me in your group—I was always sad not to have been in the picture. The stracciatella page is a bit of a minestrone unfortunately, but I'm happy that this pot-pourri of information (however illustrated!) is on Wikipedia, and I feel I may have learnt something in the process about balanced writing on the evolution of cuisine. I've been attached to the page since reading of the sad demise of Enrico Panattoni last week... In memory of a Dylan Thomas lookalike who, like Panattoni, crossed the Apennines from the same village of Altopascio to sell castagnaccio, before setting up a Tuscan osteria con cucina in Bologna. Best wishes, 86.162.136.32 (talk) 17:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Friday Afternoons

Friday Afternoons is a red link in BB's list of works, but mentioned in his lede. Is it more important than A Ceremony of Carols or others? Will there be an article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Gerda (and Tim) - sorry to butt in, but it was me who added Friday Afternoons to the lede, mainly because it's possible in my view that people will search for this given the profile the collection was given by Moonrise Kingdom. I think I will probably create an article - perhaps even today... Alfietucker (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Great! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

With you on trips, I went ahead and nominated as expected, with Friday Afternoons, - please polish blurb when you get to it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Britney et al

I have dragged myself over the finishing line with Michael Tippett, and it is ready for review, though I'm still sorting out some of the references. God, I need a holiday! I hope you can find time to cast an eye over it – and Christe receive thy saule. On another matter, I shall be going later this week to the Stamford G&S Society's current production of The Mikado. They generally do these things quite well, though like most such companies these days, the singers tend to be on the elderly side. The Three Little Maids don't have quite the right allure when their combined age exceeds 150. And Nanki-poo should definitely not be portly. I suppose the thing to do is to close the eyes from time to time. Brianboulton (talk) 17:42, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Done, with much pleasure. At the Buxton Harrogate G&S Festival there is one date reserved for a company with a minimum age of 60. I haven't, in truth, been to one of those. Poor tenors! Why can't a Nanki Poo be tubby when there has never in the history of opera been a slim Calaf? If the Stamford G&S troupe doesn't do the operas properly I imagine the ghost of Flash Harry will haunt them night and day. Did you know Mrs Tinkler was Flash's piano teacher before she taught Tippett? I have a lovely picture of the grand Sir Malcolm paying homage to her, a sweet old dame. Tim riley (talk) 15:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Yes, Tippett mentions the Tinkler/Sargent connection in his autobiography – I might add that into the article. A highly serendipitous name for a piano teacher. In Stamford, Harry's (humble) birthplace bears a blue plaque, there's a Malcolm Sargent School, and several societies that bear his name. Of Tippett, not a trace anywhere. Even the bloke in the music shop was unaware of his connections with the town. I will report on the Mikado, if I make it; there is a slight hitch in arrangements at present. Brianboulton (talk) 09:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Quarter Million Award

		The Quarter Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Benjamin Disraeli (estimated annual readership: 299,665) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers!

The Million Award is an initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Quarter Million Award for bringing Benjamin Disraeli to Featured Article status.

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers and all best, – Quadell ^(talk) 14:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Gosh! How very unexpected and pleasing! Thank you so much, Tim riley (talk) 15:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

L'Arianna

You recently participated in the FAC review of L'Arianna which resulted in the article's promotion. Could you spare a minute to look at, and possibly make a comment on, a discussion on the article's talkpage, here, about a proposed change to the article's lead image. Many thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 21:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Another request

After Tippett I am taking a couple of months' rest from music-related articles. I'm going to work on a couple of last century's women writers: Stella Gibbons and Nancy Mitford (oh! what fun!). Gibbons first. There isn't much internet material on her; could you possibly search your newspaper source and see if you can spot a decent obituary, and any critical reviews of one of her novels – preferably not Cold Comfort Farm, on which I've lots of stuff. No hurry, as I shall be away after tomorrow, until 24th or 25th, but I would be very grateful if you'd take a look. Brianboulton (talk) 22:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

It will be a pleasure. Bon voyage. Tim riley (talk) 22:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Pears

Excellent work, of course. I looked for the Punch joke first, I must admit... (I'm sure you know it, but this link for those who don't). I also note that the dates on the picture of the gravestone don't comply with MOS and insist that you re-chisel it to say "1910–86", using a proper-length horizontal line of course... Bencherlite^Talk 12:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Excellent! Thank you for that. I laughed aloud. Tim riley (talk) 12:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Request (another)

I hope you are home from your trip and that you left all well behind you. If you have a spare moment, I have offered History of Chincoteague, Virginia to the gods of peer review. It is a bit of a different tack for me; it is my favorite shore resort. An interesting history, you may find.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Still marooned in the Lake District, and will welcome a diversion. Shall join the peer review with great pleasure. Tim riley (talk) 14:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Gibbons (Stellla, not Orlando)

I'm just back from hot places. Thanks for the emailed Gibbons stuff which I've not had a chance to read yet. Anything I can do for you in your (apparent) exile? Brianboulton (talk) 08:40, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that kind offer, sir. I shall be released from internal exile a week hence and back home in Islington on 31st inst. Six weeks' exile in total! Phew! Tim riley (talk) 12:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Stefan Zweig Collection

Did you know this? How do I know what is in the collection. I found it on BWV 5. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Beloved Gerda, I think this is probably one for email discussion offline. You have my e-address and I think perhaps an email exchange or two might clarify matters. Hugs, Tim riley (talk) 23:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

If Tim doesn't mind me dropping in, this is a digitised copy of Zweig MS 1, which is the work you're looking at. There are a few bits of other manuscripts from the collection on Commons.

There are 131 musical manuscripts in the collection, most of which are online - it's missing about a dozen. Serching for "Zweig" in the "Manuscripts" field here will bring up all the digitised ones. Note that they're not all scores; some are autograph letters by composers (eg Zweig MS 12). For a complete list of what's in the "musical" section of the collection, see this catalogue search. Andrew Gray (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Apologies Tim - we must have opened the edit window at the same time and I didn't see you'd replied! Andrew Gray (talk) 23:19, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Things get better and better! Greetings, sir! Delighted to bump into you again! Tim riley (talk) 23:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

And you! I have been lost in a huge mound of administration for some time, but hoping to get back on top of things and get some more writing done this winter. In mild penance for my confusion above, I've expanded Stefan Zweig Collection with some brief notes about its scope - it must be one of the few manuscript collections to contain both Hitler and John Locke... Andrew Gray (talk) 00:17, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Maurice Leyland

It's been a while with one thing and another, but if you have the time, energy and inclination, I've another cricket PR going here. Your comments are always welcome, and please let me know if I can return any of your kind favours. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Delighted! Am just coming to the end of a compulsory exile in a minor county for nearly six weeks, and will rejoice in dipping into a cricketer from a first-class county, even if it is bloody Yorkshire. Again. Leyland flew false colours, of course, as Leyland is in Lancashire, but I suppose I must ignore that red herring. More soonest. – Tim riley (talk) 23:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Michael Tippett

Just to let you know, wherever you may be, that I have nominated Tippett at FAC, here. Any comments of course will be welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 19:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

PS: as the principal author of the Britten article you may wish to comment on a thread that has opened on the Tippett FAC page, concerning Britten and Tippett. Brianboulton (talk) 15:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hello, I must say I'm confused. If this is wrong, then what is the correct link? Best, Toccata quarta (talk) 06:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

It's already linked a few lines earlier to the Façade (entertainment) article which is the relevant one. The ballet came later and was nothing to do with Sitwell. Regards. Tim riley (talk) 07:55, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Nefarious: Merchant of Souls

Hi Tim,

Thank you again for reviewing the Kellie Loder article for its FAC. I now have another article up for featured status: Nefarious: Merchant of Souls. If you have time to contribute to its FAC here, I would appreciate any constructive comments you are willing to provide.

Neelix (talk) 20:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I shall certainly read and look in at the review. More anon. Tim riley (talk) 22:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for contributing to the Nefarious: Merchant of Souls FAC. The article has been featured and I have nominated it to go up on the main page here. Neelix (talk) 22:54, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

GA

Hi Tim. If you're not too busy would you care to review to Buah Rindu? Not been snapped up in a while.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

If it's still unadopted at the weekend I'll certainly look in. Tim riley (talk) 20:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Benjamin Britten

This is a note to let the main editors of Benjamin Britten know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 22, 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 Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 22, 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:

Benjamin Britten (1913–76) was an English composer, conductor and pianist, and a central figure in 20th-century British classical music. His wide compositional range includes opera, orchestral, choral, solo vocal, chamber, instrumental and film music. He showed talent from an early age, and first came to public attention with the choral work A Boy Was Born in 1934. His best-known works include the operas Peter Grimes (1945) and Billy Budd (1951), the War Requiem (1962) and the orchestral showpiece The Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra (1945). Recurring themes in his operas are the struggle of an outsider against a hostile society, and the corruption of innocence. He wrote copiously for children and amateur performers, including the opera Noye's Fludde, a Missa Brevis, and the song collection Friday Afternoons. Britten often composed with particular performers in mind, most importantly his personal and professional partner, the tenor Peter Pears, with whom he co-founded the annual Aldeburgh Festival in 1948; the pair were responsible for the creation of its Snape Maltings concert hall in 1967. In 1976 Britten became the first composer to be awarded a life peerage. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Tim: now that Ben has been slotted in for 22nd, I will check on the external links to see that they're all working. I'll also check the "Music" section prose for any egregious prose or punc errors. I have recently been slammed at FAC for overuse of the semicolon – admittedly a recurrent fault in my writing – and I'm a bit neurotic in that respect as a consequence. Could you check out the biographical prose? Brianboulton (talk) 19:14, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Semicolons – you and me both! I have been diagnosed as clinically addicted to them, but I shall deny in articulo mortis that liberal use of them is a fault. Better a semicolon than a tendentious conjunction any day. I'll run an eye or two over the prose of the biog section. – Tim riley (talk) 20:14, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Good work, chaps; the semicolon issue is under control, I'm sure. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:31, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Monro's Hebrides

At the peer review were kind enough to suggest that I contact you when Monro's Description moved on to the next stage. After the review I got rather distracted as I was away for longer than I expected and a now indef-blocked user took an interest in the topic, but it's now at FLC - see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Description of the Western Isles of Scotland/archive1. Ben MacDui 20:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Dilly Knox

Hi Tim

Thanks for getting in touch, and apologies for not responding more promptly.

It's great to see a page on Wilfred.

Yes, please go ahead and dive in with your changes to the Dilly Knox page. If happens to be any tidying up needed, either I'll pick it up unless someone else jumps in first.

RobertBurrellDonkin (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Schenkerian

Hi Tim. Did you see my reply to you on my talk page? I wonder what you think of events since then? Having thought about it for a couple of days, I think what Hucbald says may be the best way to go, painful as it is, because he makes clear that he's somewhat at odds with the Wikipedian way in any case. All the same, I don't want to make difficulties. If you think it's worth trying to get things moving again, please do whatever you think fit, and you can be sure I won't disrupt it. Best, Simon --Stfg (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I think you're right, and reluctantly I think I must take matters to their logical conclusion and fail the article for GA. I hope I can persuade Hucbald that Wikipedia is worth staying with, though. Tim riley (talk) 09:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I hope so too. Your closing remarks on the GAN review are very apt. --Stfg (talk) 11:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Emma

I understand and agree with your concerns regarding her edits, but I wonder if maybe your most recent message to her was a bit harsh? After all, she hasn't edited at all since my message, and she is still a newbie. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

You may be right. I like to use the soft answer that turneth away wrath as a rule, but in this case I thought something crisp and to the point was called for. I am a great believer in not biting the newcomers, but I do not take kindly to plain rudeness. Still, Point taken and if we hear any more from this source I shall be my customary emollient self. Tim riley (talk) 17:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

That darn Pavane

I'm afraid that while I tried to be concise, my notes about Fauré's Pavane are a bit lengthy. I just didn't want to leave anything pertinent out. As it was I removed some material about what happened to the manuscript. Anyway, see what you think. Orfeocookie (talk) 04:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Wells Cathedral peer review

Thank you for all the time and effort you put into Wikipedia:Peer review/Wells Cathedral/archive1 which has definitely helped to improve the article. I've dealt with some of the issues, but had to ask for help with some of the architecture & grammar questions. One of the most comprehensive and helpful reviews I've seen.— Rod ^talk 10:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

• I echo that, and I also appreciate the mention you made of my small efforts. It really encourages me to think that others notice and are glad of my work. This was worth more than a Barnstar to me. Thank you again. --John (talk) 20:31, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

  I didn't quite understand your objection to however at first, but now I'm fully on board. Eric Corbett 21:35, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Te Deum

Here's a little birthday gift for the master. I found the Catalogue (detailed info, even days of composition) by chance, are you using it? - Feel free to add, I am looking at the next, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:23, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Excellent! But ought we to be seeking a DYK in addition to the TFA on the same day? I don't know the custom and practice in such matters. Happy to support if it's generally seen as OK to have two goes on one day. By the bye, I don't suppose you can see BBC i-player, but if you ever get the chance to see John Bridcut's new BBC documentary "Britten's Endgame" I recommend it. I watched the last few minutes through misted eyes. Very moving. Tim riley (talk) 15:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, why not, also it's ok already, no support needed. (For Verdi, as you may remember, we had DYK instead of TFA, I am quite proud that I was the only one to mention him that day, it wasn't even ITN.) - Documentary sounds great! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:55, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

ps: talking of DYK, I liked this one, again feel free to add, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited André Navarra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rudolf Schwarz (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) 09:21, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Attended to. Tim riley (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

London Times or The Times?

Harry Houdini mentions Robert Browning and the fraud of Home in the newspaper the London Times, see here [10]

Also according to The Times article in the introduction it says there was an alternative spelling for the paper in other countries outside Britain "In these countries and others, the newspaper is often referred to as The London Times." Houdini was American... so it makes sense. I'm not too bothered either way... So it should be left as The Times? Fodor Fan (talk) 21:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's just that there never has been a paper called The London Times. England's oldest national newspaper was founded in 1785 as The Daily Universal Register, but has been The Times since 1788. All other newspapers with "Times" in their title, from The Times of India to The New York Times, derive their titles from the original, but that is no reason, I suggest, to give an incorrect rendering of the fons et origo, even if Houdini got it wrong. Of course, if the incorrect title is contained within a quotation we must faithfully reproduce what was written, but in plain text I think we have a duty of accuracy. It is, as you say, a small point, but it's as well to get these things right. I was intrigued by the Browning business elsewhere in the article, by the way, and much else besides. Regards. Tim riley (talk) 00:10, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Stella Gibbons

I have taken the good lady to peer review, and will glad if you are able to comment. It's not a long article, and it's been a peach to do after the trials of Tippett. Many thanks in advance. Brianboulton (talk) 22:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

It will be a great pleasure. I've read CCF ("So I should hope", I hear you cry) but that's my lot, and I know little of the authoress and look forward to making her acquaintance. You certainly had a helluva lot more to deal with chez Tippett than we did with the Britten FAC. One never knows. It's probably a judgment for your encouraging your then girlfriend to attempt to pick Sir Michael up, as I believe you once told me you did, you cad. Tim riley (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

It was her idea – I merely said "good luck to you there" or words to that effect. Actually, it was the trials of writing the Tippett article that I was referring to, rather than the slightly rocky FAC. Almost all the source material varies from the unreadable to the unintelligible, and you were very sensible to sidestep that one. Stella is (sorry, was) a fairly near neighbour of yours, since she lived on the Holly Lodge Estate at Highgate, a mileu, incidentally, much derided by Osbert Lancaster. Now, he might be a worthy future subject... Brianboulton (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Kinky Boots (musical)

You previously mentioned that you would be on the lookout for another GAN of Kinky Boots (musical). It is now renominated.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Shall do. Having looked in briefly during work in progress I have the liveliest hopes of the article. More anon at the review page. Tim riley (talk) 15:41, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

The restrictive which

Judging by your comment on my talk page here, you may be interested in this conversation: Talk:Wells Cathedral#Restrictive which.

Interested, but not willing to take sides. The argument is too finely balanced. See Fowler (p. 774 of the latest edition) "...if writers would agree to regard that as the defining relative pronoun, and which as the non-defining, there would be much gain both in lucidity and ease. Some there are who follow this principle now; but it would be idle to pretend that it is the practice either of most or of the best writers." Tim riley (talk) 12:19, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of that one. Though on the same page, just above that text quoted from the Fowler of 1926, Burchfield says that "the division between the two types is not an absolute one." Anyway, H. W. Fowler was an intensely opinionated prescriptivist who preferred certain style for sometimes dubious reasons and often contradicted himself. If you can, and if you're interested, read the introduction and notes of the recent Oxford reprint of the original Dictionary of Modern English Usage. They are written by David Crystal and they give the book perspective. Inglok (talk) 00:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. I have all three editions of Fowler, but not the recent reissue of the original with Crystal's introduction. I'll look it out at the British Library. Very glad to know about it – thank you. Crystal is a good man and, as I recall, well disposed to HWF, despite their different approaches. I have several of his books and look forward to reading his intro and notes. Tim riley (talk) 10:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Ben

How wonderful Ben looks on the front page! Congratulations for all your hard work. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 08:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Agreed - many congratulations! Alfietucker (talk) 09:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Nice work on the article about Benjamin Britten, Tim, though I was the one who helped started it. I just got back from my two month semi retirement back in October. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy birthday to the master, and thanks to you all who support him. As an extra gift, DYK is late today , so one Te Deum stays longer before the more festive one appears ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, all, for your kind comments. As I have just said on the article talk page, this article will almost infallibly be a magnet for vandals and loonies over the next twenty-four hours. I don't intend to embark on clearing up till they've moved on to Sat's and Sun's FTA. Meanwhile there's plenty I can be making myself useful with on other pages! Bless you all, Tim riley (talk) 11:21, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Lean back and enjoy, we are watching over the birthday child, - and now the Festival Te Deum is on ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I was sure you would be, Gerda, and I have taken your name in vain to that effect on the article talk page just now. I am very grateful indeed. Tim riley (talk) 11:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I am pregnant with A Boy Was Born, or should it be A Boy was Born, as the publisher has it? The article is undecided ;) - "He" will be born today, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:54, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

* Born, the second version by me, as there was no reply, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

* Questions in the context: BBC Singers has this "The tenor Peter Pears was a member of the Singers when, in 1934, Benjamin Britten composed the cantata A Boy was Born for the group. After meeting during rehearsals for the cantata, the pair became lifelong partners, with Pears serving as the muse for many of Britten’s compositions." - without a source. The Britten catalogue has as the performers the "Wireless Chorus", was the another name for the same group? - I am looking for an image of a new-born boy matching the time of the texts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

* Just found this picture book, playing with the double meaning of the title the amused me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Special Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		I wanted to give you this barnstar for your contributions to Benjamin Britten which is now today's featured article. Having such articles on such important figures in the arts is a great credit to this encyclopedia. For each person that listens to the Courtly Dances from Gloriana because of reading that article, you'll have helped light a fire in a heart! Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 11:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Atethnekos. I am much touched and very grateful, and shall proudly add the star to my user page. – Tim riley (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

History of Chincoteague, Virginia

As you were one of the peer reviewers, I thought you might like to know the article is at FAC. Many thanks for your suggestions for improvement of the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Two requests

The first is straightforward: later today Stella Gibbons will be at FAC, if you would care to renew your acquaintance there.

The second is a bit more complex. About 18 months ago you kindly created a simplified family tree for the Tichbornes, which I used in the Tichborne case article. I wonder if I can presume to ask for something similar for use in the Nancy Mitford article, which is now in my sights. The Mitfords were related to just about everybody, and a full family diagram would be impossible. What I have in mind is something which will highlight one or two of the more interesting connections. Here is the basic information:

• David G. Ogilvy (1826–81), 10th Earl of Airlie, had numerous children the eldest 3 of whom were:

1. Blanche Ogilvy (1852-1925), who m. Sir Henry Montague Hozier and had two daughters:

• Clementine Hosier (1885–1977) who m. Winston Churchill
• Nellie Hozier, who m. Colonel Bertram Romilly. Their son Esmond Romilly (1918–41) m. (1937) Jessica Mitford.

2. Clementina Ogilvy (1854–1932), who m. Algernon Freeman-Mitford, 1st Baron Redesdale (1837–1916).

• Their son, David Freeman-Mitford, 2nd Baron Redesdale (1878–1958) was the father of the Mitford sisters

3. David S.W. Ogilvy (1856–1900), 11th Earl of Airlie. His son was:

• David L.G.W. Ogilvy (1893–1968), 12th Earl of Airlie, whose younger son was Angus Ogilvy (1928–2004), husband of Princess Alexandra.

If this is too much of a task, please say so; otherwise, when you're ready just dump it in my talk. There is of course considerable doubt about some of the above assumed parentages, and even the great WSC is not exempt from rumour. How much of the scandal will find its way into the NM article is a matter for juicy anticipation. Brianboulton (talk) 17:20, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Delighted. Busy doing (agreeable) familial stuff at ancestral shack till the weekend, but will much enjoy both tasks on Friday or Saturday. Tim riley (talk) 17:43, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

William Burges

Dear Tim, Have just been re-reading your GA review and laughed so loud I spat out my sauvignon when I came across your description of him as a "Victorian menace". I'm conscious I haven't repaid my very considerable debt by taking up any of your invitations re. other, excellent, articles. I fear that, in Wikipedia, I'm a bit of a one-trick pony, and thus a disappointment to the good Doctor. But if he does make TFA on Monday it will owe more to you, and the Doctor, than to me. And for that, my sincere thanks. KJP1 (talk) 22:32, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Have replied to this exceptionally pleasing (but quite wrong) message at User talk:KJP1#VM TFA on Mon Tim riley (talk) 22:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Citation format

Hi, sorry I don't understand the difference on Noel Coward between ref 123 and the 2 refs I just added? Can you explain on article Talk page please. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:10, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Mitfords

The chart looks excellent! Many thanks for this. A few changes are required:

• Nellie Hosier's dates are 1888–1955. As she was the younger sister, hers and Clemmie's positions in the chart should be exchanged (which brings Esmond and Jessica into pleasing proximity).
• Mitford sisters: Poor Pam, forgotten as ever. There's also brother Tom. So maybe the box should be headed "Mitford siblings", with the order Nancy, Pam, Tom, Diana, Unity, Jessica, Deborah
• I think we can declutter slightly by removing the Ogilvy names from the boxes of the 10th, 11th and 12th earls, leaving just the titles and dates.
• However, in the case of the 10th earl, we should add details of his spouse, thus: "m. Henrietta Blanche Stanley". This will enable me to mention in the caption that Henrietta's sister Katharine was Bertrand Russell's mother – another splendid connection! I think it will over-complicate the chart if we try to include the Russell lineage, but it's important that I have the opportunity to mention it.

Other interesting surmises, e.g. that Algernon the 1st Baron was Clemmie's true father, and the WSC himself was Esmond Romilly's real dad, will have to be covered in the text; there are no categories of dotted line that can deal with this in the chart. The things that went on in those respectable Victorian country houses! I am toying with the possibility of highlighting in the chart those who are directly members of or ancestors of the Mitford family; thus the boxes for the 10th earl, Algernon, the second earl, the Mitford siblings and E. Romilly could be shaded differently from the others. Does that sound possible? Once again my warmest thanks for the time and trouble taken in helping with this. Brianboulton (talk) 13:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

On reflection:

• The print looks rather small, even at 500px, and now that the image size has been fixed, a bigger version is no longer available by clicking on the thumbnail. This could be a problem for some readers; would it be possible to unlock the image size? I didn't notice a vast difference in the print clarity after you had done the fix.
• I'm a bit concerned about the limited information in a couple of the "Mitford" boxes, though it may be difficult to cram more information in. Ideally I would like the following:

• Clementia Ogilvy (1854–1932), m. "Bertie" Mitford (1837–1916), 1st Baron Redesdale
• David Freeman-Mitford (1878–1958), 2nd Baron Redesdale, m. Sydney Bowles (1880–1963

Can either of these amendments be done, and if so at what cost? Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The 500px version was a bad idea, and I'll get something much better and more flexible for readers. I can definitely find some means of making the type clearer at both small and full resolutions. Watch this space. The other points are no problem at all. Shall do tomorrow.Tim riley (talk) 17:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

TFA again

Thank you for your contributions to William Burges, an example of spirited collaboration, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Spirited indeed. And when I think of what it cost you to spend time with that barbarian..... With sincere thanks for all that you did, and for making it such fun. With all best wishes. P.S. Having seen the fall-out from Wells, I have to say I'm grateful I didn't take up that suggestion!

And you weren't wrong. The vandals today are "smutty schoolboys" to a man, or boy! Mostly variants of "Burges was a poofter". Which I'm almost certain he was, but that would be original research. KJP1 (talk) 13:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Tim, nearly there, and one sensible improvement suggested, but only one. A tribute to your reviewing at GA and FA. I really would like to work with you again. I might start tampering with the young Gilbert Scott to tempt you. The current Start Class is absurd based on the article as it stands, and there's more than enough for FA. As an aside, do look at the "Organ" section of Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral, and the accompanying Talk page. Quite wonderful but I am just a smutty schoolboy at heart. Yours, KJ. KJP1 (talk) 19:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I am so thoroughly ashamed that I could not continue the discussion on the cathedral talk page. I shall stop it, this instant. KJP1 (talk) 21:48, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Bessie Jones (Welsh singer)

I created the nomination for you. You can add alternative hooks if original hook is not the only interesting fact. --George Ho (talk) 02:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Can you find Jones's recordings of Welsh songs? --George Ho (talk) 00:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

[:File:Britten-poets.jpg]

The Owen image is seemingly free on Commons, which may be incorrect. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Ooh-errr Matron!

Hi Tim, I hope all is well with you. Cassianto and I come with begging bowls in hand asking for a favour. We've got the very lovely Hattie Jacques at PR, and would appreciate any comments, thoughts and suggestions you may have. As always there is no rush, and if you are too busy, then there is no problem at all. All the best - SchroCat(talk) 07:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Nothing would induce me to associate myself with an article about a regular participant in such shamelessly vulgar films as the Carry Ons. (Oh, all right then.) Tim riley (talk) 16:59, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Evening, it's from User:Ucucha/HarvErrors - a useful little tool for those who use {{sfn}} (or those who review pages that use it). Thanks again for all your help on the PR. All the best - SchroCat (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that. Shall explore, though the tl/sfn arrangements are way over my head. Tim riley (talk) 17:07, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. One of the benefits is that you don't necessarily need to know about sfns: if you're reviewing and the text turns red then you can point out to noms that there is a problem that they need to sort out. TTFN. - SchroCat (talk) 17:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry Tim, much to Gavin's annoyance I can't work the sfn format either! --Cassianto^Talk19:49, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Good. Lure him to King's Cross and drag him into the torture chamber in the basement of the British Library, do you think?Tim riley (talk) 20:13, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Funny you should say that, I will be darkening the door step of the BL on either the 14th or 15th January if you can make the huge trek from Islingford. Mr Robey is proving to be a real pain when it comes to finding newspaper articles. I have mine white with two sugars! Cassianto^Talk 20:31, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

And funnily enough, I'll be there on Wednesday - badly hungover and with a creaking liver. - SchroCat (talk) 20:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Evident that at least some have broken up for Christmas early! Lucky sod! Cassianto^Talk21:10, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Not quite: an institute lunch and drinks on the Tuesday, and company Christmas dinner on the Wednesday. As I'll be unfit to do any work on the Wednesday I'm taking the opportunity to go and photocopy a few hundred texts! Back to work on the Thursday, sadly. -SchroCat (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Work on the Thursday? Blimey, that sounds knackering! Tim, if you see him asleep in the Geography isle at the BL, give him a friendly kick and send him on his way, there's a good chap! ;) Cassianto^Talk 21:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks once again for your hugely useful efforts on Hattie. The dear lady is now at FAC, in no small part because of your assistance. Thanks again. - SchroCat (talk) 21:41, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

What's this about small parts? Do I detect a hint of a double entendre? It will be my privilege and pleasure to look in at the FAC.Tim riley (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I can't help the DE: in the words of my next topic, "if ever I see a double entendre, I whip it out!" Listening to some of the recordings of RtH, it's all beginning to rub off on me... - SchroCat (talk) 21:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Fumes of envy in re the KH article. RtH was one of my most important formative influences in the mid 1960s and helped make me the omi I am today. I have in my gander-bag all the books on your list, and I shall be watching your every move with baleful eye. Tim riley (talk) 22:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I did notice a chunk of Riley-work in the history - and that was of absolutely no surprise to me at all! I'm enjoying listening to the re-runs on R4 extra at the moment. Feel free to join as and when you want to - I really don't mind sharing the fun of someone like Horne with someone who appreciates him. - SchroCat (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Apropos of nothing...

I've just created an article on the delightful Hyde House in Bucks, where Disraeli claimed he wroteVivian Grey. Did you ever see this wot I wrote? I do so wish we could get a picture for each one. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 01:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Very pleasing! Nice to see Disraeli cropping up; as a lifelong liberal I ought to be pro-Gladstone, but somehow Dizzy seems so much more engaging. You might like to look again at the spelling of the title of Ward's novel. In my copy of Blake, and in Bradford, it is called "Tremaine", rather than "Trentaine". With my peer-reviewing critical eye I also notice "claimed" twice in two sentences. Sarah Bradford (p. 22) says that Tremaine "undoubtedly inspired" Disraeli's efforts at a silver fork novel, and I think with that and Blake you would be justified in saying "Tremaine has subsequently been cited/recognised/identified as a model for Vivian Gray".

The list of PMs' burial places is magnificent. I shudder to think how much research you had to do. The article gave me a pleasing hour this morning baffling several of my friends with emailed quiz questions. For instance, none of them knew (nor did I till today) who was the last PM to be buried in Westminster Abbey, or the first whose grave is not on the British mainland, or – though I dimly knew this one– the only one buried in St Paul's. Marvellous stuff! – Tim riley (talk) 18:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Bessie Jones (Welsh singer)

 Callanecc (talk •contribs • logs) 17:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

That table again

I've been giving this more thought. First, I have considerably trimmed the prose in the "family background" section so that, in my view, in either the horizontal or vertical forms the chart, if readable, is too large and overpowering for the section. I have decided to put it into a separate section at the end of the article, where space won't be a problem, where we can present it in a readable size.

I've also given more thought to format. Looking at either of the present versions, the immediate visual impression is that it is the Earl of Airlie's rather than the Mitfords' family tree. So I am proposing some revisions which, without the benefit of any graphic tools, I have somewhat laboriously assembled in a sandbox, here. I'm not able to draw the horizontal lines, but it will be pretty clear to you from the original where these need to go. The objective is to highlight the Mitford line, which I think it will do in this form. For this reason I think that it will have to be in the original, traditional family tree format, which on balance I'm inclined to prefer.

Note that I have shortened the contents of some boxes, as well as eliminating the intermediate Airlies. Can I ask you to ponder, tinker, and let me know how you think it looks in revised polished form. Many thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 19:49, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

That will look excellent, especially if you let it span the whole page. I shall enjoy myself doing a first draft over the weekend.Tim riley (talk) 20:09, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

I like what I see. Just one micro-addition requested: in the Esmond Romilly box, add "m. Jessica Mitford". And, as that brings him into the Mitford family, perhaps his box should be Oxford rather than Cambridge? Brianboulton (talk) 21:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. Tangentially, to follow your forgotten-bar-one-book author Stella Gibbons, I am working in my sandbox on a forgotten-bar-noneauthor, viz Hugh Walpole. There's a vague family piety behind this undertaking, and I am finding him heavy going at times, so playing truant to tinker enjoyably with this here family tree is a very welcome diversion. Tim riley (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Walpole figures very briefly in Cardus's autobiography, as a member of Sir John Squire's cricket XI. Perhaps that is now the most notable thing about him, though he must have been regarded once, as he was knighted. He wrote an awful lot of stuff, and his total disappearance might be a story in itself. (I was in Walpole's House at school, but it wasn't him). Back to the tree: I'm going to leave it like that until PR, when reviewers will have a chance to comment, but I think it's pretty well 100 percent now. Another Riley triumph.Brianboulton (talk) 23:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Nina Stemme

Tim, I agree that we don't want a laundry list, but how high do we wish to set the rib? In 2013 Nina Stemme was i.a. selected as the world's leading female opera singer by the International Opera Award (Jonas Kaufmann was the male counterpart). It is a fairly common opinion that Nina Stemme is the foremost dramatic soprano since the retirement of Birgit Nilsson, and quite a few critics claim that she surpasses Kirsten Flagstad. For the sake of consistency, can it honestly be claimed that Hans Hotter who is also on the list holds a similar distinction as the leading Wagnerian tenor of his time? Not likely, you will most certainly be told that he was far surpassed by singers such as Ben Heppner, Siegfried Jerusalem, Lauritz Melchior, Wolfgang Windgassen and several others.

Perhaps it would be better to stop futile discussions about the relative merits of different singers once and for all by simply stating that "The majority of the leading opera singers in the past century have performed at the Royal Opera House" which would be pretty close to the truth?! Andersneld (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

No Wikipedia editor – and no opera lover – claims that Hotter was the leading Wagner tenor of his time, for the very good reason that he was a bass-baritone, the leading Wotan of his day. Though it was tempting to add Donald McIntyre and the great John Tomlinson, we settled on Hotter as the exemplar of the heavy Wagner bass-bar roles during the Royal Opera's history. Similarly, we considered the other names for the list very carefully and went for the most prominent names that have stood the test of time. In years to come Madame Stemme may or may not be seen as among the pantheon, but her apotheosis is premature at the moment. If you demur, by all means raise the point at the article talk page and see if you get a consensus in favour of Stemme's inclusion. – Tim riley (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Viscount shootdown

Hi Tim, this is just a quick note to let you know that I've just nominated Air Rhodesia Flight 825 for FA. This was one of the uglier incidents of the Bush War of the 1970s; guerrillas shot a civilian airliner down and executed most of the survivors amid the wreckage (some of the passengers survived by hiding before the attackers reached the crash site). Rhodesia obliterated guerrilla bases in Zambia and Mozambique in response. If you have the time and are interested, I'd very much appreciate any thoughts you might have on this. The review is here. Thanks, and I hope you are well. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll make sure to look in over the next few days. You have a wonderful record of bringing to the attention of the WP community important things we were hitherto ignorant of. More anon. Tim riley (talk) 19:40, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

That's one of the nicest things anybody has ever told me and I feel extremely flattered. Thank you very much for the very kind words, and keep well; hope you're having a good run-up to Christmas. —Cliftonian (talk) 21:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

A Boy was Born

Can you tell me what EGO stands for in the listing of the Britten-Pears Foundation saying "boys' voices of the EOG". Imogen Holst conducted the first performance of the revised version, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Assuming you mean EOG, it's the English Opera Group. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, helpful, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Comment from Marosc9

Sorry but I don't understand why you're objecting to my revisions - there are no such nationalities as English, Welsh or Scottish any more as these nations ceased to exist when the union between England, Wales and Scotland took place - I'm changing all references to English, Welsh and Scottish nationalities to British for the sake of correctness. Marosc9 (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Marosc9 - you'd have a very hard time justifying this to some fervent Scots and Welsh nationalists I know, not to mention Irish! I really think unless we know the subject preferred to be known as "British", then it's probably best not to stir up this particular hornets nest. Alfietucker (talk) 21:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Marosc9, I cannot imagine that you seriously think of Robert Burns as a British poet. The state to which Burns, Dylan Thomas et al belonged was manifestly Great Britain/later the United Kingdom, but Dylan was Welsh, Burns was Scottish and e.g. Kipling was English. Statehood is separate from nationality. There is a Royal Scottish National Orchestra, an English National Opera, and the BBC National Orchestra of Wales. I or other contributors will revert your changes if you persist. As, to be fair, I think you are well-intentioned but inexperienced in editing Wikipedia I am copying this message to your talk page. Tim riley (talk) 21:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Marosc9, I agree with Tim riley, and I think you will not find many here who agree with you on this issue. Wikipedia works by editors forming a consensus as to how to proceed. Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision-making. Please seeWP:CONSENSUS for more information. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

It's that tree again

I have had a further thought, namely a dotted line extending rightwards from the Stanley box to a new box containing: "Katharine Stanley, m. John Russell, Viscount Amberley", from which drops a solid line to a box containing "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell, 1872–1970". All new boxes in the Stanley grey colour. Don't you think that would round the box off nicely, and provide even more talking points, e.g. who the hell wasn't related in some way to these pesky girls? Let me know what you think. Incidentally, when the chart is finally complete we will need to add sources to the image page. I have these aplenty. Brianboulton (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Done, sort of. To keep the same generations of the various families on the same rows I have put Lady Amberley on the same line of latitude as Bertie and Blanche, and put Bertrand Russell on the same row as Farve, Nellie and Clemmie. See what you think. I'll move the boxes to different rows if you prefer, natch. Tim riley (talk) 15:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Katharine needs to be on the same row as Henrietta, her sister, and (odd though it may seem) B. Russell needs to be on the same line as Bertie Mitford. So a slight adjustment is called for, but I'm impressed by your prompt attention (I thought it was only me who spent Friday afternoons at home watching Countdown). Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. Now back to bloody Hugh Walpole for me. I've reached the Why Did I Take This On stage, with no sign of the home straight yet awhile. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Spot on, now. I will add the sources to the image page. Now, there are lots of WP Mitford articles – one for each sister, one for Tom, one for Farve and one for "Mitford Family", maybe more. Some of these are in poorish shape, and when I'm done with Nancy I will tidy them up a bit. Your splendid chart could be included on most of these, don't you think? Brianboulton (talk) 17:50, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

By all means, but I disclaim "your splendid chart". It's your splendid chart, and all I did was carry out your directions, with a little help from that nice Mr Gates and Microsoft. It really is a most therapeutic and soothing activity, and beats the daylights out of wading through Henry James's impenetrable epistolary prose looking for nuggets in re his protégé Walpole. And if you think that's bad, you should try A C Benson's diaries! Dear, oh dear! Nancy Mitford may have had only the sketchiest idea of the difference between the comma, the semicolon and the full stop, but her prose is never less than lively. Tim riley (talk) 18:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Disclaim all you will, but giving me the credit for the chart is like giving Jennens the credit for Messiah. Gerda wouldnot approve. Brianboulton (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

An unanswerable argument. Tim riley (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

	The Seasonal Netherlandish Barnstar of Cultural Transcendence
	Thanks for all the help with the Early Netherlandish painting PR, and hope you have a good christmas. Ceoil (talk) 15:26, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

How very nice! One does what one can, and in this case it was an education as well as a pleasure. Tim riley (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

You seem like a very nice man and it was interesting and rewarding responding to you. The review was a breath of fresh air in an often difficult enviroment. Ceoil (talk) 21:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Benjamin Disraeli

My wife has been known to send thank you cards to people who have sent her a thank you card. I don't approve though I dare say is helps economic growth. So, despite myself, thank you for your thanks notification, and, more to the point, it arose from a little discussion atWikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Rothschild. Thincat (talk) 22:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Warmest tha... what am I saying! Tim riley (talk) 22:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings

	Christmas greetings for 2013 and best wishes for 2014. Peace on earth and goodwill to all May you take pleasure in all you do and find success and happiness
	Brianboulton (talk) 21:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

		Holiday Cheer
		Victuallers talkback is wishing Tim Season's Greetings! Thanks, this is just to celebrate the holiday season and promoteWikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - Vic/Roger inspired bythis - you could do the same

Merry Christmas!

	A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
	May 2013 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals! All the best Gavin / SchroCat (talk) 20:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

	Merry Christmas and best wishes for a happy, healthy and productive 2014!
	Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:25, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Nadolig hapus

Martinevans123^{Santas Grotto} wishes you and yours

"Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda"

---

May the true spirit of Christmas bless you with warmth and peace ....

Happy holidays

Wells Cathedral

Following your PR of Wells Cathedral (and input from lots of others) we have finally bitten the bullet and nominated it atWikipedia:Featured article candidates/Wells Cathedral/archive1 - you asked me to let you know when the nomination went in. Thanks for all help so far.— Rod ^talk 14:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Jeffrey-skitch-pinafore.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jeffrey-skitch-pinafore.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree filesbecause its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry atthe discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:30, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

		Happy holidays.
		Best wishes for joy and happiness. Keep up the good work on Wikipedia! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Mitfords

I have repositioned your chart in the Nancy article, to bring it close to the relevant text – it stood in some danger of being overlooked, stuck on the end. What do you think? I have also sized it to upright= 3.5 and restored the thumb. I think myself it looks fabulous, but others may demur. Brianboulton (talk) 16:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

PS it may be appropriate to remove your "work in progress" note from the image page. Brianboulton (talk) 16:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I've removed the note. Don't hesitate to commission further such trees for future articles if wanted. I genuinely get great satisfaction from doing them. Tim riley (talk) 16:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)