User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 92
 | This is an archive of past discussions about 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. |
| Archive 85 | ← | Archive 90 | Archive 91 | Archive 92 |
The Signpost: 29 July 2015
- News and notes: BARC de-adminship proposal; Wikimania recordings debate
- Recent research: Wikipedia and collective intelligence; how Wikipedia is tweeted
- In the media: Is Wikipedia a battleground in the culture wars?
- Featured content: Even mammoths get the Blues
- Traffic report: Namaste again, Reddit
Dening quote
Hi Brian—someone's tagged the reference to homoeroticism in the 1984 Bounty film as dubious and requested a quotation from the source. I don't have the book and the Google preview doesn't show me the relevant page (p. 346). I seem to recall you have the book. Do you think you could have a look and fish out a supporting quote from p. 346 to put in the citation? Thanks, hope you're well. — Cliftonian (talk) 15:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've answered the point, which seems part of a generally somewhat misinformed view, on the article's talk. Please feel free to join in any discussion that develops – when you have finished working out who "Spencer Christian" is. Brianboulton (talk) 17:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 August 2015
- Op-ed: Je ne suis pas Google
- News and notes: VisualEditor, endowment, science, and news in brief
- WikiProject report: Meet the boilerplate makers
- Traffic report: Mrityorma amritam gamaya...
- Featured content: Maya, Michigan, Medici, Médée, and Moul n'ga
Hi, I've taken this article to peer review as I am hoping to nominate it at WP:FAC. If you're interested, would you mind reviewing the article? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- Can't promise anything – I've spent a lot of time recently on two footy articles (Carrow Road and the Liverpool thing), and I'm not sure I can face another so soon. Maybe ping me in a couple of weeks if no one else picks it up; in any event I wish you well with this. Brianboulton (talk) 23:39, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for your PR and FAC comments and/or edits to Chetro Ketl, which is now a featured article. It was a long and interesting process, but thanks to a wealth of insights and suggestions the article is now among our best. Thanks for taking time out of your busy editing schedule to help me. RO(talk) 16:46, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- I'm pleased that Chetro Ketl has been promoted, and I appreciate you taking the trouble to tell me. You'd be surprised how often, when I've spent many hours helping to get an article over the FA hurdle, once it's promoted the nominator doesn't want to know! Brianboulton (talk) 23:31, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- Your input was especially helpful, and I'm very grateful for the time you spent working on it. Thanks again, Brian! RO(talk) 23:35, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
September
The autumnal torch is yours. Carry it high! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:28, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Friday lunchtime
You seem to have more than your fair share of bad luck with your email systems from time to time. Noon in the Wehwalt Arms, Kings Cross will be fine with me. Remind me to discuss the way forward on that library matter. Given the circumstances of the benign conspiracy, the drinks will be on me. Tim riley talk 15:33, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Excellent! Brianboulton (talk) 15:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Now I think about it, the bar is only ten minutes' walk from The Wellcome Library, membership of which is free (see here) and gives you remote access to a range of marvellous databases, here. Might be worth finishing our glasses half an hour early and strolling down to the Wellcome building, you with passport and gas bill in hand. I find it a most valuable resource. Tim riley talk 08:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Alas, my passport is currently in escrow at the pp office while they deal with its renewal so I doubt I'll have it for Friday. We may have to do the library thing another time – my time is a little stretched on Friday, as I have to "move on" after an hour or so. Brianboulton (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Right ho! I have your recent message about source-checking and will put it on my to-do list. Tim riley talk 22:07, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Alas, my passport is currently in escrow at the pp office while they deal with its renewal so I doubt I'll have it for Friday. We may have to do the library thing another time – my time is a little stretched on Friday, as I have to "move on" after an hour or so. Brianboulton (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Now I think about it, the bar is only ten minutes' walk from The Wellcome Library, membership of which is free (see here) and gives you remote access to a range of marvellous databases, here. Might be worth finishing our glasses half an hour early and strolling down to the Wellcome building, you with passport and gas bill in hand. I find it a most valuable resource. Tim riley talk 08:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jeannette Expedition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seven Islands. 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) 09:43, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Kurt Vonnegut FAC
Hello. We've gone to FAC with the Kurt Vonnegut article. Just a heads up. Cheers, --ceradon (talk • edits) 14:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 August 2015
- News and notes: Superprotect, one year later; a contentious RfA
- In the media: Paid editing; traffic drop; Nicki Minaj
- Wikimanía report: Wikimanía 2015, part 2, a community event
- Traffic report: Fighting from top to bottom
- Featured content: Fused lizards, giant mice, and Scottish demons
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
- Blog: The Hunt for Tirpitz
Replacement of I on Saturday with Daily Telegraph
Brian, apologies if I've caused offence but I've replaced your source with the Telegraph. FWIW (not a lot) you don't just leave any classified documents out. If Haslam is right, this is a simple case of treachery and there will be a lot more coverage. JRPG (talk) 20:44, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
- You don't given any reason for the change, so I've reverted to my own source which is equally reliable. If you have a reason other than a personal preference for the DT, then let's hear it. But please don't change the source without discussion (you can add the DT as an additional source if you wish). The repercussions of Haslam's discovery, if verified, could be considerable, though carelessness and stupidity should not be confused with treachery. Brianboulton (talk) 21:03, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
- Greetings Brian. I will add the Telegraph shortly. I'd never heard of your source for a UK news item, it isn't on line and it doesn't appear to meet the UK WP:Suggested_sources#Current_news recommendations. I have a Defence background and this article is potentially so immensely damaging to what remains of Profumo's reputation that I feel it does require an additional source. No offence whatsoever was intended and I hope what I've said helps. Regards JRPG (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
- No offence taken. As the i newspaper has a ciculation bigger than that of the Guardian and Independent combined (see here), I think it can rank in terms of status with other national British newspapers as a reliable source, despite not running an online version. I will try to read Haslam's book when it comes out, as I'm sure you will, too. I shall be interested to see if historians and commentators see this information as a blow to Profumo's posthumous reputation. I have doubts they will be much interested – few under about 65 remember who Profumo was, and the Cold War has lost its potency in the current generation. Point of interest: I encountered Profumo at Toynbee Hall in the mid-1980s when I gave a WEA lecture there. Quietly spoken, no pomposity, a little reserved. It was very hard to imagine him at the centre of a sex/spy scandal. Brianboulton (talk) 22:46, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
- Firstly thanks for an interesting response. My initial attempt to find "the i" met with failure & I have to admit I didn't associate it with the Independent. The conspiracist in me wonders why this is all being put into the public domain now. Vetting of MPs on committees with access to defence secrets will have been tightened up years ago but reasons for declining security clearance aren't published. Perhaps the book will explain to the public that top ministerial positions are dependent on the Cabinet secretary agreeing the candidate isn't a risk. We'll see! JRPG (talk) 18:19, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
- No offence taken. As the i newspaper has a ciculation bigger than that of the Guardian and Independent combined (see here), I think it can rank in terms of status with other national British newspapers as a reliable source, despite not running an online version. I will try to read Haslam's book when it comes out, as I'm sure you will, too. I shall be interested to see if historians and commentators see this information as a blow to Profumo's posthumous reputation. I have doubts they will be much interested – few under about 65 remember who Profumo was, and the Cold War has lost its potency in the current generation. Point of interest: I encountered Profumo at Toynbee Hall in the mid-1980s when I gave a WEA lecture there. Quietly spoken, no pomposity, a little reserved. It was very hard to imagine him at the centre of a sex/spy scandal. Brianboulton (talk) 22:46, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
- Greetings Brian. I will add the Telegraph shortly. I'd never heard of your source for a UK news item, it isn't on line and it doesn't appear to meet the UK WP:Suggested_sources#Current_news recommendations. I have a Defence background and this article is potentially so immensely damaging to what remains of Profumo's reputation that I feel it does require an additional source. No offence whatsoever was intended and I hope what I've said helps. Regards JRPG (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Question
Hi Brian, I have a question about TFAR. I've gotten myself in bit of a pickle and need your advice. I had planned to run an article about WWI literature and was working on Hemingway's In Our Time (short story collection), got bogged down and decided instead to run "Big Two-Hearted River". For some reason I can't fathom I forgot the River article has already been on the main page, so I'm trying to decide whether I can finish In Our Time and get it through FAC in time for an October TFA. The timing will be very tight and I'm wondering if that will be a problem? Thanks. Victoria (tk) 15:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
- Hello, Victoria. If you're thinking of 5 October, as the 90th anniversary of the New York edition... well, Chris will probably want to have scheduled that date by 20 September. That gives you less than five weeks for peer review, the necessary work, and the actual FAC. And FACs are taking longer these days. A later date in October would probably be OK, if you go to PR fairly soon. I'd certaily be prepared to review it – let me know. Brianboulton (talk) 17:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
- Regarding your comment at TFAR, the visual arts section is likely to keep growing for some time; everything in {{William Etty}} with the exception of Mlle Rachel (only discovered relatively recently so hasn't had enough critical commentary to write a full-length article) ought to pass FA with minimal modification, and when/if I get around to it you should have similar batches forthcoming on Millais, Watts and possibly Dadd as well. The limiting factor is the FAC throttle (and my not wanting to swamp FAC with a flood of same-y articles at once) rather than the lack of articles; if anything, you may need to increase the burn-off speed to prevent a buildup of 19th-century artworks at WP:FANMP. ‑ iridescent 17:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks Brian, I thought that would be the case. When I double-checked "Big Two-Hearted River" a few days ago I was rather shocked to find it had run, but there was a family death the week it ran and I was gone, so I can't beat myself up too much. Anyway, that was a big miss on my part, but these things happen. Thanks for your reply. Victoria (tk) 18:11, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
- Just to clarify – I was thinking more about the centennial of WWI, rather than the 90th anniversary of a book. Best. Victoria (tk) 18:25, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
- Regarding your comment at TFAR, the visual arts section is likely to keep growing for some time; everything in {{William Etty}} with the exception of Mlle Rachel (only discovered relatively recently so hasn't had enough critical commentary to write a full-length article) ought to pass FA with minimal modification, and when/if I get around to it you should have similar batches forthcoming on Millais, Watts and possibly Dadd as well. The limiting factor is the FAC throttle (and my not wanting to swamp FAC with a flood of same-y articles at once) rather than the lack of articles; if anything, you may need to increase the burn-off speed to prevent a buildup of 19th-century artworks at WP:FANMP. ‑ iridescent 17:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Jeannette
Glad for the progress report. I'd be willing to review if you like. Finetooth (talk) 05:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
- That would be most welcome. You will find a few echoes of one of your earlier efforts – Franklin's lost expedition – which I see I passed for GA in March 2008. Seems a while ago now. Brianboulton (talk) 09:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
- Congrats on the FA. I'd ignored Franklin for a long time but this week took it upon myself to replace the dead URLs and do other minor fixing. I'm planning to add pre-emptive archiveurls as well. In 2008 I'd never heard of link rot. Finetooth (talk) 21:12, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Scandals! Outrage!
Warren G. Harding, who you reviewed at PR, is still at FAC, where you kindly did the source review. He was in the news a bit last weekend, I did see it managed to make the British news sites so perhaps you saw. Much more of this, and he'll be entering the Republican primaries! Your comments welcome, especially since I've had to make changes to allow for the news, and I'd appreciate your comment on that.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:45, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
- Harding could indeed be the Republicans' trump card next year. What you've added re the love child concurs with what was in the British press and I see no reason to add more. My recollection is that I not only did the source review but supported enthusiastically – I'll check to make sure I remember rightly. Brianboulton (talk) 18:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, yes you did, thanks for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I do hope we're still [theoretically] on for main page at the end of August... Which of the FA delegates would you recommend I chat with about the possibility of the article being promoted in time? --Dweller (talk) 08:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Chris did the August scheduling, so you should talk to him. Carrow Road has two supports at present, needs at least one more. Brianboulton (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- I count 3, not including a "happy to support if those last few points are addressed" where the points have been addressed, so sort-of 4. --Dweller (talk) 12:25, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Pinging Crisco 1492 --Dweller (talk) 12:27, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Two solid, one tentative, one "if..." etc. I suppose that's four-ish. Brianboulton (talk) 12:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- :-) --Dweller (talk) 12:32, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- We've got JC's Girls for the 31st, and we've already rescheduled that one once already. On my talk page Neelix said that he'd also be available on September 2nd if there are any difficulties with the article during TFA (knock on wood there won't be), so if Brian is willing to reschedule Elena for September 4th, and JC's Girls for September 2nd, then Carrow Road could probably be fit in. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. I do appreciate the difficulties of trying to schedule something that isn't yet an FA. If it's any help, I'll refer back to this discussion. I appreciate the upheaval caused to Neelix and Brian and hope this can work out OK. First step, of course, is to get the FAC closed... --Dweller (talk) 15:52, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- :-) --Dweller (talk) 12:32, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Two solid, one tentative, one "if..." etc. I suppose that's four-ish. Brianboulton (talk) 12:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, the amazing Laser brain promoted the article. So now it's just down to you superduper schedulers and whether you can manage to ... schedule it. --08:54, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- So Brian, are you willing to reschedule Elena? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- No problem – I'll do it this weekend when I'm home again. Brianboulton (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Much appreciated, chaps. --Dweller (talk) 21:34, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Alright. Pinging User:Neelix so he knows. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:33, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping, Chris! That works for me. Neelix (talk) 22:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 19 August 2015
- Travelogue: Seeing is believing
- Traffic report: Straight Outta Connecticut
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Bentworth's sources
Hi Brian, thank you very much for your excellent source review on Bentworth last week. Me, Dr. Blofeld and We hope have completely overhauled the sources (our progress can be seen at Talk:Bentworth#Sourcing) and I think I'll re-nominate very soon. I've been asked if you could take a look at it first to see if there are any more obstacles that remain before we take it to FAC again? All unsourced content has now been removed from the article, in particular the climate paragraph. Everything else has either be rephrased or re-structured, which makes it totally reliant on its existing sources. I'll be grateful for any comments you can provide! Regards JAGUAR 19:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
- I saw the work going on on the talkpage – well done. I will take a look in a day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 20:48, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Rod Steiger
Evening, any chance you could provide some input at the peer review?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:22, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Pore Judd is daid...I may not be able to get to this until next week; I'm away for a few days from Thursday, and have much to do before then. Bentworth is still highly problematic - see talk page. Brianboulton (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 August 2015
- In focus: An increase in active Wikipedia editors
- In the media: Russia temporarily blocks Wikipedia
- News and notes: Re-imagining grants
- Featured content: Out to stud, please call later
- Arbitration report: Reinforcing Arbitration
- Recent research: OpenSym 2015 report
Out of action
 | I shall be out of communication until Tuesday 1 September – Monday evening if I'm lucky. I'll deal with outstanding requests, messages etc as soon as i can. Brianboulton (talk) 09:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC) |
Shooting the moon
Hi Brian, this is a courtesy note to let you know that the Moonraker (novel) article you kindly peer reviewed, is now at FAC. Should you have any further thoughts or comments they will, of course, be most welcome. All the best – SchroCat (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- Duly noted – will visit in a day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 22:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
| | This is an archive of past discussions about 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. |
| Archive 85 | ← | Archive 90 | Archive 91 | Archive 92 |