User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 18

Poppea

Hi, I've done a little bit of copy-editing to the article, also after going through my bookshelves, I've identified a source that isn't mentioned in the article, namely "the Coronation of Poppea: An Introduction by Nikolaus Harnoncourt" in his Teldec/Das Alte Werke recording. It's dated 1974 and is on pp.10-17 of the booklet of his (presumably 1993) CD release 0 2292 42547-2 7.

There are a couple of interesting remarks which you might want to incorporate.

On p.12 He analyses the Octavia/Ottone scene and notes how word repetitions always have dramatic significance and how Octavia interrupts Ottone's verse. (Indeed on p.14 Harnoncourt notices that CM interleaves verses that are sequential in the text on more than one occasion, even having scene 2 of Act 1 begin before scene 1 has finished.) NH (p.12 again) considers that CM "deals far more crassly" with Seneca using "ordinary sequences and occasionally empty coloraturas which are not even emphasised by words. The woodeness of his replies set off a stiff musical form." On p.13, he refers to Monteverdi using "concitato genere" described in CM's introduction to his 8th book of madrigals - rapid semi-quavers sung on one note indicating rage. On the sketchiness of the scoring in the two surviving manuscripts, NH notes two factors. He says "if a composer was interested in having his works performed at several places, he had to write them so that the particular chapel master could adapt them to his local conditions; for this reason it was improtant to leave open as much as possible." but also notes that there were certain conventions which "made it unnecesary specifically to write down what was taken for granted." He notes that the ritornelli in the 3-part Venetian and 4-part Neapolitan one both have the same bass line. "It is a matter of different good and proper versions of the same thing; probably Monteverdi himself wrote only the bass to them." (both quotes p.15)

And a more general quote (p.10) "He incorporated in these works [ritorno & incoronazione] all the innovations of his young rivals - they were also his pupils - and brought the genre, which over 30 years earlier he had helped towards its decisive breakthrough, to a climax... What is difficult to understand... is the mental freshness with which the 74-year old composer, two years before his death, was able to surpass his pupils in the most modern style and to set standards which were to apply to the music theatre of the succeeding centuries."--Peter cohen (talk) 22:18, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Peter, for this helpful material. The general quote looks an excellent way of concluding the Music section, and I will definitely use it, or most of it. I will also try and use some of the pp. 12/13/15 material in the Composition section, my only concern being to avoid undue technicality in a general encyclopedia article (there's a lot of similar stuff in Carter's and Rosand's books). You can tinker with my wordings if you like. Brianboulton (talk) 23:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Prod me at an appropriate time and I'll have a look. I understand what you mean about technical language. I've exhausted myself over the last couple of says trying to make sense of the more technical stuff about Tornrak. BTW I saw your mention of perhaps having sound files. I'm very much in favour of having them (within our fair use policies) in opera articles. If you can illustrate musical points it makes it easier for lay readers (in which I include myself) to make sense of them. (Indeed I still feel we should have them in Rhinemaidens. Maybe featuring some of the singers we mention... Sutherland sing Woglinde's opening lines...) One PS. I've spotted I mistyped one of the quotes above and have corrected it something to do with being up at the time I last edited Wikipedia this morning. Anyway must put the ferrets and myself to bed now...--Peter cohen (talk) 23:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Brian. I've taken a first look through the article and am very impressed—you reallly did an excellent job. I'll read it through a couple more times before commenting on peer review, but so far I have just one question: Why are "Morality" and "Roles" sub-sections of "Writing"? To me, it seems they should be separate sections in their own right, but perhaps this is just my preference. Jonyungk (talk) 22:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I think you will find that "Roles" is a section in its own right, not a subsection of "Writing". As for "Morality", this subsection is basically about the nature of the story; it was developed from a couple of sentences originally in the "Libretto" section, and I don't see it as out of place where it is. I'll keep in mind the suggestion that it be made into a section of its own - I have no strong feelings on the matter; meanwhile, I will look forward to your detailed comments at peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 23:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I've left a few comments on the peer review page but will continue reading the article in case any other questions arise. Jonyungk (talk) 22:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikify banner

Hi, Brian. The Wikify banner is not for you, it's to encourage other editors to help out with linking all the notable names in the list. I wikified the conductor names. I was hoping that the wikify banner would help you by getting someone else to assist with this task. If you don't think it's helpful, feel free to remove it. I assure you that my intention was to ease your workload on this. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, sorry if I sounded snappy. Leave it for a day or so by all means. I'm concentrating on the main article at the moment, but I will get back to the discography. Meanwhile, thanks to you and others for the linking you've been doing, saving me a chore. Brianboulton (talk) 18:43, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Anna Bågenholm/archive1

Hi Brianboulton. Thank you very much for your excellent review of Anna Bågenholm. :) Could you check the comments I left at the review page? Thanks, Theleftorium 20:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Neville Chamberlain

Now at PR:[[1]]. I'd appreciate comments. The article is freshly written so I know there are bugs, though it has now passed GAN.

Not sure what is next. Not a bishop or polar explorer, don't worry.

Many thanks for your help, here and at Khrushchev.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

Sorry, I tried. First time doing it. Sorry if I "wasted your time", even if that obviously wasn't my intent. Next time someone messes up, maybe a little friendlier would be nice. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Late night editing makes me grouchy, sometimes. Sorry, no offence meant. Brianboulton (talk) 09:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Smetana1854portrait.jpg

File:Smetana1854portrait.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Smetana1854portrait.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Smetana1854portrait.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Upper Pine Bottom State Park

	<font=3> Thanks again for your peer review and support - Upper Pine Bottom State Park made featured article today! Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

PR

Thanks - I will be glad to look at Poppea and her coronation. Rome is one of my favorite places, so enjoy yourself! I will be happy to update the backlog and work to keep it minimalized. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Please don't be offended...

...but I thought perhaps this grammar rule might help you out. :) I noticed a lot of missing hyphens in Poppea. Please take this as kindly as it is meant! Awadewit (talk) 06:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure about "missing" hyphens. A quick check gave me several instances where I had hyphenated terms unnecessarily, e.g. "opera-house", "recently-discovered", "semi-quavers" etc, and I have removed these. Can you help by indicating instances where hyphens are actually missing? Brianboulton (talk) 17:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I added them (usually using the edit summary "grammar") - they seemed to all involve the use of the term "seventeenth-century" as a compound adjective. Awadewit (talk) 17:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi Brianboulton, I was wondering whether I could make good on my threat and ask whether you'd mind looking at an article (Sholes and Glidden typewriter) I have at peer review (here). I fear it doesn't have quite the adventure of an Antarctic expedition, however. Эlcobbola _talk 14:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad to see that you're back in, well, semi-harness, and will be pleased to review your article. Brianboulton (talk) 15:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

You obviously put a great deal of time and consideration into your comments; I'm very appreciative. I've addressed those I could and left follow-up comments/questions for others, if you have a moment. Эlcobbola _talk 16:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Poppea

Please let me know when you nominate Poppea for FAC, so that I can vote "support" for your fine work. :) Awadewit (talk) 18:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I will. It won't be nominated for a week, because on Sunday I am going away (to Rome, where it all happened!). I hope to nominate it shortly after that. Brianboulton (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Waterfalls, waterfalls, waterfalls!

Feeling wikistress? Wish you could have a vacation someplace with two dozen waterfalls? Well the next best thing is here!

If you want to, please come look at pictures of waterfalls and pick which ones you like best. You'll be helping make a better article too.

Thanks, Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

P.S. That wikilink again: User talk:Ruhrfisch/Waterfalls

York Park

Thanks for your hard work and have nice break ;) Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 21:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Certainly. Sorry, I didn't see your message on my talkpage and was going to send you a message but didn't want to seem too pushy. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 20:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time. Don't have time now but will go through in a few hours. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 23:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The Political Cesspool

I have been doing more work on The Political Cesspool, in accordance with your Peer Review. I believe I have addressed each of the concerns you had before. When you have time, perhaps you could give the article another look? Stonemason89 (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I won't be able to get to this until I'm back from my travels, some time after 20 November. I may need a prod, so give me a ping after then. Brianboulton (talk) 12:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. Stonemason89 (talk) 22:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Your request at TFA/R

Hi, I removed your article request as malformed as you added a sixth article without removing one. Note that I raised some questions about your point calculations too.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

PR and Poppea

Have a good trip, I will be happy to take care of the PR backlog as long as you want. I am also working on my PR of Poppea - all fairly nitpicky so far. Sorry to be slow, I have been spening a lot of time sorting through waterfall images. Enjoy your break! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back - backlog is not too bad. I made some comments on Poppea and the waterfalls voting is still open (if you are interested). Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:23, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I made two brief replies at the Poppea PR - otherwise all issues I had have been addressed. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:47, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky and the Five

Hope you enjoyed or are enjoying your time off. I was thinking about eventually resubmitting Tchaikovsky and the Five for peer review. Maybe when work abates on Poppea, if you have time, could you look over it and let me know what you think? Thanks very much. Jonyungk (talk) 22:52, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Just sending a ping. Am doing some polishing on Tchaikovsky and the Five and may soon send it for a second peer review. Jonyungk (talk) 18:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Just submitted this article for peer review and would appreciate your input. Thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 18:58, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I've been looking forward to this. Just got some other business to settle first, then I'll be on to it. Brianboulton (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

York Park query

Thanks for your tireless contribution. A minor query. I made a suggestion at the York Park FAC that drew this response. I would not have thought a fire could itself be deliberate - it implies consciousness. Any thoughts? hamiltonstone (talk) 05:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For being one of Wikipedia's most skilled contributors and for creating dozens of well-crafted articles. Keep it up! –Juliancolton | Talk 05:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Political Cesspool

Since you're back from your vacation now (hope it went well for you!) I was wondering if you'd mind taking another look at The Political Cesspool. Stonemason89 (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I have put a few extra comments on the article's talkpage. Brianboulton (talk) 00:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

John Beilein

Thanks for "exploring" outside of your expertise. I have responded to your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

List of Parliamentary constituencies in Hertfordshire

Thanks for the review. I've worked on your suggestions and I think it's ready for a second look. A couple of your suggestions prompted a few changes you probably wouldn't have predicted, but I'll be interested to see your opinions. WFCforLife (talk) 18:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

That's certainly the aim. At the very least, I think I can create tables similar to the last two for all of them in time. The history would be a bit more difficult, as the availability of information will vary from county to county. Hopefully I'll have this at FLC quite soon. Thank you very much for the help. WFCforLife (talk) 10:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I guess there's no time like the present. The nomination page can be found here. Regards, WFCforLife (talk) 12:02, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm absolutely certain that the timeline is accurate. Given the confusion, the sourcing needs to be up to scratch, which is an issue as I don't have access to the Craig book, and the source I used (while accurate) wouldn't pass FL. Nonetheless, I should have them all cited by the end of tomorrow. Thanks for your continuing interest, it's much appreciated. WFCforLife (talk) 13:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving! I am thankful for you and your contributions here! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

.

.

.

Congratulations!

I just saw that L'incoronazione di Poppea earned its FA star. Congratulations! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Congrats from further west! Finetooth (talk) 05:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Definitely well deserved—congratulations! Jonyungk (talk) 06:12, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to you all for the careful reviewing and support. Brianboulton (talk) 11:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Grecian Urn

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ode on a Grecian Urn/archive1‎, could you revisit? Ottava Rima (talk) 05:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Will do so within 24 hours - am somewhat overcommitted at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 11:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

It's fine. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

By the way - you mentioned Scotland based articles elsewhere. There are quite a few intellectuals and poets whose pages have gone without improvement. If you ever want to get more Scottish pages up to level, just drop me a note. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hugh MacDiarmid and Thea Musgrave might do for a start. I won't have time for a while, but I might well be interested in developing these, particularly Thea. Brianboulton (talk) 16:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll make sure to try and contact the Poetry project (there are others, like Robert Burns, that have very little in terms of Wiki pages on them). I am starting a large push for content creation in January and beyond (getting WikiCup people to help) and I will add them to the list. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I responded to your comments. By the way, I try to contact people individually for ad hoc peer reviews. Unfortunately, one of Mrathel's and mine's copyeditors was recently banned for being a sock puppet (crazy stuff). I will keep you in mind as being someone who is interested in the topic. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 22:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I responded and I think I covered everything now. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know that the nomination has been restarted and would appreciate your opinions on the article as it now stands if you have the time to take another look. Thanks. Mrathel (talk) 14:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

York Park

Take all the time you need :) 800 people; however can't find in source so removed. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 07:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For your fantastic improvements to York Park. Thank you. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 20:24, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

William Speirs Bruce

William Speirs Bruce went FA today and it has your signature all over it. Nice read, thanks.  : )

(Ice Explorer (talk) 22:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC))

thanks

a bunch for your review of Anti-Hindi agitations of Tamil Nadu. --CarTick 21:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

peer review

hi, sorry i didnt knew that rule, so wht am i suppose to do now, should i retrieve two of those three articles or wht ? and if i am suppose to retrieve those then whts the process ?

regards. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 18:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

No need to do anything this time. I'll treat them as having been nominated on successive days. My note was really to advise you about the next time you come to PR. Brianboulton (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Andrew Sledd/archive1

Shouldn't this be archived? It looks a bit long in the tooth.. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

See this - every time the bot closes the review the nominator reopens it. I'll take this up with the guru. Brianboulton (talk) 15:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, fun! I'll leave it alone then, no desire to "reward" that sort of behavior. Obviously, I'm working through a few more PR sections for sourcing today... whee! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:53, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback Ice Explorer

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