This is an archive of past discussions with User:Brianboulton. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
==
Thank you! ==
The Polar Barnstar
For bringing together information about early polar expeditions and telling us the fascinating stories of these adventures, we award you the Polar Medal. Your thorough research and your evocative writing style have made this corner of Wikipedia a delight to read. Thank you! Awadewit (talk) 15:09, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Crean statue
Yeah, I took the photo. I have attmpted to add this info to the image page, not sure if I have done it right though, the GFDL tag doesn't really have any parameters you can fiddle with...Lozleader (talk) 16:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Brian: Thanks for addressing many of the comments while I find time to get back to Wikipedia. Concerning: "What is the difference between the Smith book in the "References" and the Smith book in the "Further reading"? Do we need to cite both?" The Smith in the References is my book, I'm not sure who added the "Further Reading" book. Suggest we just delete the whole "Further Reading" section - do you agree? Zatoichi26 (talk) 04:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: "ability" vs. "attitude"... personally I would have left it at "ability" since we have more concrete evidence of his ability than his attitude... for example the man hauling Crean did on the Discovery expedition. Zatoichi26 (talk) 04:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Also: I read your suggestions/summary of comments on my talk page... I do intend on getting to it but it's midnight and I am now Wikipedia'd out. Will get back to it tomorrow afternoon (Saturday). Zatoichi26 (talk) 05:09, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Concerning the "dramatic" sentence, how about "... he was involved in a xx month ordeal which involved drifting on the pack ice..." I'll have to check the time line to see how many months it was. Zatoichi26 (talk) 23:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Brian: I've been mulling over "effectiveness in the field" vs. "attitude and work ethic". I prefer the latter, it's just plainer English. I think both claims are supported by the content of the article. To your point earlier, someone might say "what does effectiveness mean in this case?", and here I think it means both his cheery and light attitude (see: singing in the James Caird), and his ability to work (see: being one of the most consistent man-haulers on the Discovery expedition). By the way, nice job fielding all the other issues in the FAC review. I took care of the "lying about his age to get it" part, as far as I can see that's the last issue Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
It's true, I may disappear again without warning, but while I'm here I'll dip in and out. I did start on Shackleton while it was at FAC but I think I was somewhat distracted before the end. If it isn't on your list, the Shackleton-Rowett Expedition is in dire need of work. Not the most exciting of expeditions to be sure, but it deserves better than the current article and would round Shackleton off (would make a nice short FA. Arf) Yomanganitalk11:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Dealing with family stuff. I remember reading about it somewhere other than Fisher; I'll have to try and remember where that was. Yomanganitalk11:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Article idea
Due to my Mrs. Chippy obsession and the lovely photo of Mr. Crean with two ponies which I rotated a bit, I was wondering if it would be possible to write an article on Animals in polar exploration or something similar. Obviously the dog and pony show would be in, but could also mention my beloved Mrs. Chippy and other pets, as well as the wild animals used as food sources, and any other animals I am not aware of. Perhaps even a brief section on using humans as pack animals (manhauling). While I doubt any article on a single polar exploration animal could get to FA, my guess is this might be able to (and could probably be bipolar, if the word applies properly here). Yours, Ruhrfisch><>°°19:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
It's a great idea. I have rather a lot on at the moment, so would not be able to begin work immediately, but it sounds like it would be fun to do. I'll give it some further thought, but better not let Ealdgyth know - she seems to blame me personally for the fact that the dogs and ponies generally got eaten, so...need to tread carefully. Brianboulton (talk) 19:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I forgot the rats on board ship (as a reason to have a cat, could also mention losses to rats). While I imagine Mrs. Chippy was also eaten, please don't tell me (if you know). Ugh. No hurry - take your time, just an idea. Ruhrfisch><>°°19:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I did start on more or less exactly that article (actually Animals in Antarctic exploration) a long time ago but it got messy, so I wrote the entirely unconnected Elizabeth Needham instead. It's a massive topic with plenty of detail; Scott does go on about those ponies, plus you have Crean's rabbit, Mrs Chippy, Husky Hoosh and Charles Green having a whale of a time here. Chocolate and Penguin Surprise. Surprise! There's no chocolate! (I'm pretty sure Mrs Chippy wasn't eaten: McNish would have blown a gasket). Yomanganitalk19:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in my response regarding your review. Looking at it, I probably should have waited until I came back from my travels before submitting the article for a peer review. Regardless, I have addressed your concerns to the best I can tell, and would appreciate if you could look the article over once again. Any comments would be well received. Thanks. Kaiser matias (talk) 03:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Tom Crean source
Hi,
The reference to the play is in both the reference and note sections. Is there a way to shorten the mention in the note section. It looks kind of weird to have an exact duplicate in there. - Mgm|(talk)22:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I tend to use the same template for in-line citation as I do for listing sources - not a universal practice, but accepted. I suppose it stands out because it's the last citation and the last listed source. If Zatoichi wants to drop it from the sources list, that's fine by me. Brianboulton (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I abbreviated the Maeve Kennedy citation, now it is more consistent with abbreviated Notes and full References. If you don't like it, feel free to revert it back and change it. I believe all the comments are addressed - when can we expect a verdict? Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Does Fisher give a source for Macklin's reply of "Chiefly alcohol, Boss"? I haven't seen that anywhere else and I see it isn't in Wild's account either. Yomanganitalk17:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories
Hi Brian! Thanks for taking the time to review our article and help us with our nomination to GA status. We should hopefully have all of your suggestions done by the end of the week, if not sooner. --Katie322 (talk) 20:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Review request
Hi Brian, I've been consistently impressed by your excellent ability with prose, so I was wondering if you could take a look at 1994 Christmas nor'easter. If possible, could you help with copyediting, or alternatively leave some comments regarding improvements at the talk page? Thanks in advance. –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone19:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I just completed a light copyedit, and admittedly, I found very little worth changing. I found the prose very refreshing and engaging. I have one question, though; I noticed that the article, in a few instances, uses the word "apparently". Is this word used in the sources? Aside from that, the article appears to be well on its way to featured standards. –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone20:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey Brian, you're a great copyeditor. If you've got time, could you take a look at Scene7 and let me know if you see anything that should be changed or fixed? I've also opened a Peer Review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Scene7/archive1 if you feel that longer comments are necessary.
Hey Brian, listen, I may need your help in writing the info. about Paycheck failing the audiences expectations. See, I found this source and I'm not quite sure how to write the reason for the film garnering negative reviews. I mean, I have some way of writing it, but it doesn't make sense. You think you can help? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)19:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I'll do that. I looked at recognized publishers and they all mentioned the same thing about the film not being the same as the novel, but again, I didn't know how to write it out. I'll get to it. Also, I think I got the comment about Eckhart's performance getting positive reviews in Erin Brockovich, not sure if its good enough. Question: Does your offer still stand in looking over Maggie Gyllenhaal's article, before an FAC nomination? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)21:55, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Awesome, will be waiting for any comments. Also, there's a user who's helping out in copy-editing the article and leaving suggestions, just wanted to let you know, so there won't be a conflict of any sort. And, I added your suggestions to Eckhart's article. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)22:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
I fixed the link that you posted on my page for Mozart; I think the one I changed it to is the correct one? The first list, it looks pretty good to me. I've certainly never seen anything like it in terms of the subject. It looks like the list uses some interesting criteria; would there be debate as to what belongs on the page or not? As for the second list, it looks like a list for sure. Gary King (talk)22:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Brian, would you mind having another look at the Darwin Rebellion article please. I have addressed everything with the exception of the Frank Alcorta referencing. I approached a few people to assist me here, but didn't have any luck and have since had to return the book to the library. Anyway, let me know if I should nominate again for GA status. Regards, Spy007au (talk) 14:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Tom Crean FA
Hi Brian,
Great news! You deserve a large portion of credit too, so thanks for the help. I have been thinking of Apsley Cherry-Garrard too, and I do intend on getting back to it. I am going to take a break though, actually over the last 6 months I've been having trouble with carpal tunnel due to work, so I need to lay off the computer at home for awhile.
Hi there Brian, I'm not sure if you had a chance to look at my question on our talk page, (if you have sorry if I'm being repetitive!) but I just thought I would add it here, and see if you have any suggestions...Thanks!!
QUESTION
I'm not sure how to order the characters or to explain their purpose in the character section...maybe you can help
The order the characters appear in the book are: Lucy, Chaq, Ixchel, Cleófilas, Clemencia, Inés, and Chayo
Lucy is a representative for the first section of the book
Ixchel and Chaq are representatives of the second section of the book
Cleófilas, Clemencia, Inés represent characters from 3 of the longest stories of the book which happen to be contained in the last section, and therefore I believe they are important and should be present in the character section.
Cleófilas, Clemencia, Chayo represent the 3 female archetypes, La llorona, La Malinche, La Virgen de Guadalupe
Do you have any suggestions for how to order the characters, and also how to introduce this section with an explanatory statement? I know you had suggested "The following are characters from each section, representing the female archetypes in the book" but not all of the female characters are representatives of these archetypes... Thanks so much!--Jacqui Nicole (talk) 06:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories - GA REVIEW
Hi Brian! It looks like we've finished all the detailed review points on the article's talk page. I do have one last question: In our Reception section, I put The American Library Journal in italics and The New York Times in italics and also added a wikipedia link...is this the right thing to do in this case? Other than that, I think that article is about a thousand times better than the state it was in a week ago! Thanks for all your help! We truthfully couldn't have done all this without you :) Much appreciated. Let us know of any other edits that we should do. --Katie322 (talk) 06:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I know you are probably annoyed by wrestling articles, but if its not a bother, is it possible for you to copyedit the above article. (It is unique as it is from the 90's and it involved a death of a wrestler at the event). There is also a peer review for it.--TRUCO01:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
The two primary issues to look for are reliability of the sources, and format of the citations. Reliability is demonstrated in a number of ways, notably if the web site lists its sources, or if the source has received coverage in outside, secondary sources. Meanwhile, checking for proper formatting of references is fairly easy, and requires primarily a basic understanding of the MOS. Also, one thing to look for is the mixing of {{citation}} and {{cite web}} (or a variation), as those two produce different formats. Hope this helps, –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone01:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: Maggie Gyllenhaal
Well, I haven't contacted the user who passed the article, but, if its worked for you, I'll take your advice on that. Also, I will let the other user, who helped with PR process, know about the FAC nomination. I think I'll leave some comments on some users to help out. Thanks for the advice. :) -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)17:22, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Brian. Thanks for taking a look at the article. I'll work on finding some more references and adding the relevant details you requested. Some of thie information might be difficult to find, so it could take a while before it is ready to re-submit. It would be great if you help.
One or two points I can clear up though are;
As far as I'm aware ALL of the students are blind or partially sighted. I haven't changed the statement regarding this, however, because I'm not 100 percent certain of this.
The college is co-educational.
According to a reference I added to the infobox there are approximately 200 students. Not sure how I can discover info on the numbers in the intervening years though. Any ideas?
I don't think there are any academic requirements for entry. Again, any ideas on this would be appreciated.
I've added a few more references. Some statements I've had to source from the college's website but I'll keep looking for some third party references.
The college website has lots of images that would enhance the article, but I'm not sure whether I could use these in the article and what the procedure is.
Hi again. Have now managed to reference quite a lot of the material (including when the college changed its name). Let me know what you think. Cheers Paul Largo (talk) 23:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. Have now referenced just about everything in the article and expanded it per your comments to include all available information. I think I've done just about all I can to it for now so I'll put it forward for GA nomination again and see what happens. Feel free to review it. Thanks once again for the pointers. Cheers Paul Largo (talk) 19:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, my fiddling was premature: I drifted back over there and didn't realise you were just putting it out. I'll leave it alone for now. Yomanganitalk01:33, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that before. How the world has changed - that's probably why it hasn't been republished recently (apart from its being deathly dull that is). Yomanganitalk01:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Not much wrong with that; I'm afraid I couldn't use many of my tomatoes. The reasons and timing for Crean declining the invitation aren't known I think, so the rider is speculative. The SPRI has more extracts of Shackleton's diary online which generally show him in the tired, listless mode, so you might like to squeeze one of those in. Macklin says Shackleton was suffering a "severe facial neuralgia", this might be better than the non-specific "in great pain". And I put quotes around Lief Mill's words, please remove them or correct the quote if it is wrong...it just looked a little strange otherwise. Yomanganitalk13:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I missed this reply, somehow. Anyway, re Crean, according to Smith Crean refused Shackleton's offer saying "I have a long-haired partner now", which I reckon can be paraphrased as family responsibilities. I've added a bit more diary, and brought in back pains and severe facial neuralgia in place of "in great pain". Quotes round Mills's words are fine - that's what he said. Brianboulton (talk) 17:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Tulunids
Sometime ago you suggested some improvements for the article Tulunids. I have implemented all that I agreed with. I'll be nominating that article for GA status. If you like, you can review the article, as you haven't edited it much.Bless sins (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
WrestleMania XXIV
Hey, you never finished the peer review for WrestleMania XXIV. You stopped at the background, but the peer review is now over. You review was very helpful, so do you mind completing a review for the rest of the article on it's talk page? Thank you in advance (if you can). iMatthew14:09, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, its a question of time. I didn't commit myself at the PR to do a full article review; I did what I could, in some detail, for the lead and background sections. In any case I am not happy reviewing wrestling articles, because I find them difficult to understand. I have tried to help in the past, not always successfully, and I think it would be better for someone with a greater rapport with the subject to complete the review. This is in no way a criticism of you, or your subject, and wish the article well. Brianboulton (talk) 00:20, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey there...
Can you take a look at the sourcing queries on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ralph Bakshi and tell me if I'm out of line here? It appears that the editors are using citations to sources they did not actually consult, but that were sources for works they did consult. When questioned, I'm getting "I've done this before and it's fine", which I do not consider fine, but I'd like a second opinion. Ealdgyth - Talk13:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
The peer review template was removed from the article's talk page - sometimes this means the person has tried to archive the PR, but since they did nothing else, I restored the PR template. If you have not already done a lot of work, you might want to ask if they still want a peer review. The article is a nominee at WP:GAN, so you could leave a note on the talk page about your PR comments if you have already worked on the review. Either way thanks, Ruhrfisch><>°°01:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
i listed Igbo people on the peer review page, but it was forwarded to the automated peer review. You may remove Igbo people from the peer review as I had not known how to do this.
Ukabia (talk)
History of Kirkcaldy
hello again
since you posted feedback on the History of Kirkcaldy article in early November, i have sorted all the problem areas. this is just to let you know. Kilnburn (talk) 22:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Eric Blom
Thanks, Brian. I've owned Grove V since about 1968, and have used it on literally millions of occasions. My local library doesn't have New Grove (or even Grove V for that matter; I live in a fairly small town), and for one reason or another I don't have online access to it (I really must do something about that one day). So, Grove V is a very dear friend of mine, and I have Eric Blom to thank for that. I sometimes come across utterly inexplicable gaps in our coverage of notable people, and this was one of my recent shocks. Then it occurred to me that I had always been so focussed on reading and using the dictionary that I'd never stopped for a moment to wonder about its editor and his personal story. Obviously, others have had the same experience, which, I think, speaks volumes about the quality of the work. He seems to have had the knack of writing sometimes very contentious text (such as the extraordinary rubbish about Rachmaninoff) without readers thinking "Who is this absolute wanker and where can I find some information about him?". Hence, no Wiki-article on Eric Blom. I looked online but couldn't find very much about him. He didn't have an article in Grove V either - or so I thought until I was looking in the Supplementary Volume for something else, and there it was. It's all about his work, nothing about his private life, no mention of any marriages or children, and I still have no idea what prurious conclusions to draw about that. There's not even "he never married" (which is often a code for "he was gay"). I must keep tracking this part of his life down. It's probably all there in New Grove. On my next visit to a place that has it, I'll definitely look him up. Thanks again. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Re: Maggie Gyllenhaal
Thank you, I really appreciate your comments, a lot. I would like to thank you in helping me get the article to FA, cause with your guidance, the article is now FA, and very excited. Yeah, I too was wondering why no one had responded to the FAC, seemed kinda strange, for me at least. But, the comments came and I got them, so. Yup, this is my first FA and like you said it won't be my last. ;) Yes sir, I am indeed 18. :P Do you think you might be interested in helping me get my second FA? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)21:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Re: Necrid
Fixed all the text issues you pointed out and a few others, feel free to hit me with any more you find. Also left a query on the discussion page regarding one point you made.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
TFA
Brian, you need to finish up that entry at WP:TFA/R by adding it and removing the other below. The blurb isn't crucial, as Raul usually writes them, but you do need to complete the bookeeping of adding and removing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:JohnQuillerRowett.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:JohnQuillerRowett.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 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
The images are the best bit from the report I agree (the crew photo will make a particularly nice addition in 30 years time). I think the prose is fine - it will always get altered at FAC by people who prefer their own style or spot the odd typo, but at least that indicates they've read some of it. The image of Bruce is public domain as he is credited as the author and he died more than 70 years ago. Use {{PD-UK-known}} as the licence tag on commons if you upload it. Yomanganitalk00:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I will be glad to take a look at it in FAC. I had seen the article in Peer review, but had not had a chance to weigh in on it or do more than a cursory read through. I hope to bring another bridge to peer review soon - need to finish expanding the article first though. I do not speak Portugese, but it looks like a pretty close translation of a familiar article. Ruhrfisch><>°°21:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Brianboulton. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Thanks for uploading Image:JohnQuillerRowett.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 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).
){kind=link}
