Jump to content

User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 111

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 105←Archive 109Archive 110Archive 111Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114

FA for Fawad Khan

Hi, I've recently listed Fawad Khan in FA candidates. I'll an honor for me if you consider reviewing it.Amirk94391 (talk) 04:00, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

I may not be able to provide a full review but I'll try and leave a few helpful pointers. Give me a few days, though. Brianboulton (talk) 14:36, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Re Sandbox 17, under this article's entry, you list it as going through the GA process; it sort of did—but was then subsequently delisted, about a fortnight later. Just FYI, is it relevant to your table? —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 16:36, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
I didn't know that Sandbox 17 was under any other eyes but my own! The main purposes of my table are (a) to check when sources reviews are needed and (b) to monitor how long articles spend in the FAC process. It's not relevant to me that the GA status was subsequently revoked - I like to see what prior reviewing FACs have undergone, regardless of the outcome. Brianboulton (talk) 16:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
I feel extremely mislead. I assumed it was your next FAC. A movie, perhaps, plugging a somewhat obvious gap between such classics as—err—16 Candles and Apollo 18. And it turns out that all it is housekeeping. Pah! —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 17:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

A bit late ...

... congratulations for your birthday (yesterday, right?)! Thank you for mentioning good faith today, can't be said enough. Fireworks and good health for you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

|Thank you, Gerda, for your good wishes. Brianboulton (talk) 14:59, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Loss of MV Darlwyne

I'm a bit wary about changing anything on an article like this. I note throughout Greatwood Guest House is refered to but to my memory it was always called the Greatwood Hotel locally and a google search seems to support this. A guest house would be a smaller establishment. Theres a couple of other small things, did the boat really anchor mid harbour at Fowey or tie up to a vacant buoy? Dodman is a headland rather than a prominent landmark, boats undergo modifications not alterations. I know you've done a lot of work on this article so wanted to run things by you first Lyndaship (talk) 08:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this note. The Greatwood is variously referred to in the sources as a hotel or a guest house, and I've no objection if you want to change it to "hotel". The sources don't tell us whether Darlwyne anchored in Fowey harbour or attached itself to a buoy, but the point is hardly significant. Dodman's Point is indeed a headland, and "modifications" is a better word, and you're welcome to change these too. With all good wishes, Brianboulton (talk) 15:12, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for quick reply. I've done a bit more checking and indeed all the google hits except those which I think come from the Wikipedia article call it Greatwood Hotel so I will change it. I guess the Guardian (which I don't have access to) called it a guest house). In those days hotel had much more cachet than guest house so I sort of recall the local tourist board insisted that to be listed as a hotel you needed 10 letting rooms. I agree that with regard to the loss its not important if Darlwyne anchored or moored at Fowey but I am concerned. Firstly there is mention earlier of the equipment Darlwyne had on board which includes two anchors but suggestions that she was generally ill equipped and to go to sea without an anchor certainly qualifies as inadequate. Usually a harbourmaster will prohibit anchoring in a harbour due to undersea mooring cables and other obstructions, if the skipper did actually anchor it could be a mark of a willingness to disregard the rules. It's also human nature to do the easiest thing and dropping an anchor, letting it catch and motor back up to it and then pulling it back up at the end of the day is a lot more work then slipping a painter through a mooring buoy. Then theres the suggestion that on the return trip the engines broke down, considering the wind, tide and sea state one thing a skipper should be thinking about is dropping the anchor - did he have an anchor? Now our source doesn't say that she anchored (or moored) in Fowey but frequently I see lazy journalists of reputable sources get their background facts from Wikipedia, the net result could be that in the future someone challenged the statement in the article that Darlwyne anchored as not in the source given and someone else produces this RS quote to prove that she did anchor and therefore must have been equipped with anchors when she was lost. I would like to change the text to "Bown did not tie up to the main town quay – bystanders report him saying that the vessel was "a bitch to handle" – and used the dinghies to land the party". I guess really I should have put this on the article talk page, feel free to copy it there if you feel thats appropriate. I'll change the other minor things shortly Lyndaship (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks to editors like you who are willing to review articles such as North Cascades National Park and offer excellent suggestions, it is now a Featured Article! Your random refs check was most helpful and appreciated!--MONGO (talk) 16:47, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tom Driberg 1930s.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tom Driberg 1930s.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Rhinemaidens

Thank you for the article! I wonder about our image on commons of the three in 1976, vs. this which has left what's right on ours. What is right, and who's who? Lilli Lehmann is in the middle, but where is Minna Lammert on which version? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Obviously the image has been reversed at some stage, which creates confusion as to who is who. If you can find conclusive evidence that the München Deutsches Theatermuseum photograph is the original version we can replace the present image. Otherwise we should either leave things as they are, or simply withdraw the present image from the article. Brianboulton (talk) 14:52, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I have no conclusion, - hoped somehow for you ;) - no need to withdraw, just not give a name other than Lilli. However, until someone tells me differently, I think it looks properly rendered and captioned on the akg site. - We know who the three are, and it is not tremendously important who's who, - would just be nicer knowing. - I'll ask at project opera. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:10, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Got an answer there: "ours" looks credible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I think that it should be part of Das Rheingold, as a document of the first Bayreuth performance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
I agree. I'm working on the performances section now. Brianboulton (talk) 18:58, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much. Good timing, Bayreuth Festival opening tomorrow, with Lohengrin, - strangely folowed by only Walküre from the Ring, no complete cycle. I added articles on two of the first Bayreuth Rhinemaidens to the occasion. Please keep an eye on Minna Lammert and Marie Lehmann (soprano) when on the Main page, - I will be out most of the day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I just found this, for your amusement, "Mottl, if you don't hold me still, I'll spit on your head!" - Lehmann goes into great detail about the performances, Bayreuth and 8 years later in Munich, in Mein Weg. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

The three will be pictured on the Main page tomorrow, with a link to Rhinemaidens, and I hope some will click through to Das Rheingold which is developing nicely, thanks to you. 13 August is an important day in my bio, and that's a nice coincidence. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Biblical criticism/archive1

Hi Brian; I know you're very involved with the peer review process, and I wondered if the above might pique your interest? It's a new editor who is putting some serious work into a highly important topic with her eyes on FAC; I'm "mentoring", and there have been a lot of improvements in a short time. Any comments you have - or suggestions of editors who might be interested - would no doubt be warmly received. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Josh. I'm taking an indefinite sabbatical from reviewing and from all things appertaining to FAC (except for the odd prior promise which I'll honour). So I don't think I'll be able to provide a detailed review of this article. I will, however, read it and offer the odd comment or two, but give me a few days. Brianboulton (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Brian; I'm sorry, I didn't know about that. Thanks for your willingness to take a look, though. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Das Rheingold, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hans Richter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Loss of MV Darlwyne scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that I've scheduled Loss of MV Darlwyne to appear on the main page as today's featured article 1 August 2018. If you need to make tweaks to the blurb, it is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 1, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:37, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for telling - with the help of others whom you kindly mentioned - "the desperately sad story of a joyous, celebratory sea trip that went tragically wrong and claimed 31 lives. The boat was unlicensed, overloaded and ill-conditioned, and carried minimal lifesaving and emergency equipment, a man-made disaster if ever there was one. Yet nobody was prosecuted, and the general British public, intoxicated by the country's World Cup football success that weekend, scarcely noticed – except in Cornwall." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tom Driberg 1930s.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tom Driberg 1930s.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

You may do your duty, Mr B-bot. Brianboulton (talk) 09:41, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Thought you'd like this...

...Roald Amundsen's ship Maud has returned after a century. Hope all is well with you, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

How nice to hear from you! Thank you for drawing the Maud story to my attention – not Amundsen's most successful venture by any means. Years ago I thought to develop the Maud article into something worthwhile, but never did so. I've recovered most of my health since the nadir of two years ago, but I'm much less active on Wikipedia than I used to be. I'm working quietly on a few articles, but I've pretty well stopped nominating or reviewing – I can't find the old zest. I trust that you are in good health and that life is treating you well. Brianboulton (talk) 20:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
I am glad to hear that you are feeling better and am in good health and doing well myself (though busy, as always). I thought of you earlier this summer when I saw this memorial depicting the Arctic in Dublin's Christ CHurch Cathedral. Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:06, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Peer review newsletter #1

Introduction

Hello to all! I do not intend to write a regular peer review newsletter but there does occasionally come a time when those interested in contributing to peer review should be contacted, and now is one. I've mailed this out to everyone on the peer review volunteers list, and some editors that have contributed to past discussions. Apologies if I've left you off or contacted you and you didn't want it. Next time there is a newsletter / mass message it will be opt in (here), I'll talk about this below - but first:

  • THANK YOU! I want to thank you for your contributions and for volunteering on the list to help out at peer review. Thank you!
  • Peer review is useful! It's good to have an active peer review process. This is often the way that we help new or developing editors understand our ways, and improve the quality of their editing - so it fills an important and necessary gap between the teahouse (kindly introduction to our Wikiways) and GA and FA reviews (specific standards uphelp according to a set of quality criteria). And we should try and improve this process where possible (automate, simplify) so it can be used and maintained easily.

Updates

It can get quite lonely tinkering with peer review...
With a bit of effort we can renovate the place to look like this!

Update #1: the peer review volunteers list is changing

The list is here in case you've forgotten: WP:PRV. Kadane has kindly offered to create a bot that will ping editors on the volunteers list with unanswered reviews in their chosen subject areas every so often. You can choose the time interval by changing the "contact" parameter. Options are "never", "monthly", "quarterly", "halfyearly", and "annually". For example:

  • {{PRV|JohnSmith|History of engineering|contact=monthly}} - if placed in the "History" section, JohnSmith will receive an automatic update every month about unanswered peer reviews relating to history.
  • {{PRV|JaneSmith|Mesopotamian geography, Norwegian fjords|contact=annually}} - if placed in the "Geography" section, JaneSmith will receive an automatic update every yearly about unanswered peer reviews in the geography area.

We can at this stage only use the broad peer review section titles to guide what reviews you'd like, but that's better than nothing! You can also set an interest in multiple separate subject areas that will be updated at different times.

Update #2: a (lean) WikiProject Peer review

I don't think we need a WikiProject with a giant bureaucracy nor all sorts of whiz-bang features. However over the last few years I've found there are times when it would have been useful to have a list of editors that would like to contribute to discussions about the peer review process (e.g. instructions, layout, automation, simplification etc.). Also, it can get kind of lonely on the talk page as I am (correct me if I'm wrong) the only regular contributor, with most editors moving on after 6 - 12 months.

So, I've decided to create "WikiProject Peer review". If you'd like to contribute to the WikiProject, or make yourself available for future newsletters or contact, please add yourself to the list of members.

Update #3: advertising

We plan to do some advertising of peer review, to let editors know about it and how to volunteer to help, at a couple of different venues (Signpost, Village pump, Teahouse etc.) - but have been waiting until we get this bot + WikiProject set up so we have a way to help interested editors make more enduring contributions. So consider yourself forewarned!

And... that's it!

I wish you all well on your Wikivoyages, Tom (LT) (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Good wishes, and letting you know TFA for Burgess is 22 September 2018

Hoping you are doing well, and letting you know the above. All the best,--Wehwalt (talk) 23:24, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for a "neutral account of this enigmatic figure"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Leslie Hylton

As I've been completely swamped in the real world for the last couple of months, I've only just seen what you've been up to with this article. I'm not sure if you've finished with it, but it's looking pretty good to me. There's a couple of other places it might be worth looking. There's a "List of West Indies Test cricketers" book by Bridgette Lawrence that I'll dig out and see what it says about him (I imagine not a lot). The other option is the Daily Gleaner which has an online archive of all their old newspapers (I think it's "newspaperarchive". I used to have a subscription when I was still writing things, and had one through WP for a while through WP:LIB, but I don't any longer. But someone might be able to have a look and there must be something there. Sarastro (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

It's good to see you active again, and hope your real world concerns have worked out satisfactorily. The Hylton article is pretty well as far as I can take it. I'm fairly sure the Lawrence book won't have anything we don't have already; as you say, someone with newspaper archive subscription may be able to pick up deatils from the Gleaner, but I'm not sure it will provide us with what I think are the deficient areas of information. Like, which clubs did Hylton play for in Jamaica, and what were his noteworthy performances at this level? Did he continue to play club cricket after his retirement from the first-class game? I'm happy to leave the article to others to improve, if they can locate the information – I have no plans or intentions regarding PR or FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 13:44, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Source review

Greetings,

do you think you can take a look at the sources of Ubinas, which is currently in FAC? Thanks in advance! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:30, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Jo-Jo. I am afraid I am not reviewing at FAC at present, except in the cases of one or two long-given promises, so I am sorry I'm unable to help. Brianboulton (talk) 13:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
I understand. I'll see if someone else picks up. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 29

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018

Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Archive 105←Archive 109Archive 110Archive 111Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brianboulton/Archive_111&oldid=876360064"