Jump to content

User talk:Brianboulton/Archive72

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tree

Not a monkey puzzle tree (requiescat Araucaria) but that of the Mitford galère. See here and demand changes ad lib. File:Mitford-selective-tree1.jpg. Thine, Tim riley (talk) 00:43, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. See what you think. Don't hesitate to call for further changes. I use Microsoft PowerPoint to construct the tree and then save a copy of the slide as a jpg. Further edits, to the original PowerPoint slide, are easy to make. Parenthetically, as one Scouser to another, I find the title "the Earl of Airlie" plays merry hell with my Received Pronunciation. The Dingle Umlaut clicks in, and he becomes the Url of Urley. – Tim riley (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I would have thought it more likely the Airl of Airly, but that might be Brum – any Scouse in my speech was ruthlessly extirpated during my Home Counties upbringing, post 1960, so what do I know? You can see the chart in draft situ at User:Brianboulton/Sandbox10. This is at 500px, the same sizing as we used in the Tichborne equivalent. The text isn't finalised yet, but it will be that sort of thing. The chart is pretty much as I envisaged it, now, but I'll let you know if I think anything else needs doing. As I said earlier, a magnificent job. Brianboulton (talk) 18:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Good. Well, if you're settled on 500px I'll upload a version at that exact size, which will make the print much easier to read. En passant, I'm no expert on Winston, but I have never had the impression he was much obsessed with country matters. Then, what do I know? And as to the other stately home corridor creepers I couldn't possibly comment. They didn't, to be fair, have television in those days. Tim riley (talk) 21:27, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
500px it is, per Tichborne, so please upload at that size. Winston's biographers naturally don't mention the rumours of his misdeeds, though they confess that he and Clemmie had "difficulties" at times. Mary Lovell in her book about the Mitford sisters mentions the rumour, and also the "remarkable physical resemblance between the young Winston and Esmond Romilly". Esmond apparently dropped hints, too. I'll probably work in a footnote. Brianboulton (talk) 21:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
The only WSC bio I have is Roy Jenkins's gloriously readable volume from a decade or so ago. I'm in the Lakes till Wed but shall have a swift rummage in the index thereafter and report back if I find anything. Have done the 500px deed, but am disappointed. I'll tinker. Ignore me for the moment. Tim riley (talk) 22:35, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Jenkins doesn't even mention E. Romilly. Thanks for the 500px; I will add source information to the image page. Brianboulton (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Still tinkering. More over the weekend. I enjoy doing things like this, and it's worth fine-tuning till they're spot-on. Am ahead of you chez Hattie Jacques, below, but then of the many buttons people can press to get me responding the one marked "Carry On Films" is not the least effective. Tim riley (talk) 14:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

(Continues below)

Third FAC

Appreciate the feedback for Of Human Feelings. Unfortunately my requests for feedback from other editors were not in time (I'm guessing busy with Thanksgiving weeknd), and it was archived. I opened a third FAC here if it's of any interest to you. At least two of the dozen I asked replied and said they'll look into reviewing it, so there's hope LOL. Dan56 (talk) 01:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Life is a Dream: Translation issue

Hello, BB. Can you comment on this translation issue at Talk:Life Is a Dream? Thanks for any guidance. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:40, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

JSTOR

It seems to have been withdrawn. Discussion here. SlimVirgin (talk) 02:20, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Hi, as someone who took part in the previous nomination can you comment on this. —Vensatry (Ping me) 04:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I rather doubt that I can find the time, at least for the moment (heavy review commitments and other projects). If the article is still at FAC in a week or so, I'll try to look then. Brianboulton (talk) 17:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, as the nomination is still open any chance you could have a look? —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
I've responded to your comments. —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


Britten

A Boy was Born: it's not my private opinion that this is the title of Britten's work, but the opinion of the publisher and respectable sources. I would rather follow them than MOS which is not holy scriptures to me. For once I believe in Commonname, a name that reader will recognise. I agree that there is also A Boy Was Born, - the name of a festival in Sheffield. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

We're not talking about the title, there's no disagreement on that. It's about the format of the title in this particular publication. If you were writing for a magazine or newspaper, you would be held to the style guide of that publication, and in my view the same should generally apply here. I know MoS is not holy writ, but on an issue like this you'd need a pretty strong consensus to circumvent it. For what it's worth, in his Britten biography, Humphrey Carpenter uses A Boy Was Born, as does Arnold Whittall in his joint Britten/Tippett study. So scholarly opinion does differ on the matter. Brianboulton (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I accept that scholarly opinion may differ. I still think that the published version is what I would follow, - it was published during the composer's lifetime and I would guess that it had his consent. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:32, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

Ooh-errr Matron!

Hi Brian, 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) 07:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

  • I will get to it. A most entertaining subject, and a joy to write I should imagine. I generally find that, with these types of article, other eyes get there first, leaving me not much to do, but I'll be pleased to add my two pennyworth – though it may be a few days. Brianboulton (talk) 10:07, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Hi Brian, yes it was a fun article to write. However, with most of the subjects we tend to stick to, they are tinged with some sadness and tragedy. I grew up with the Carry On's and this made it even more pleasurable to co-write. Glad you may be able to join us! CassiantoTalk 10:29, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Brian, with Hattie's PR now closed, can I just extend my thanks for the excellent review. Your comments have gone a long way in terms of improvement and SchroCat and I are both truly grateful. CassiantoTalk 09:58, 16 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) 21:42, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Biographers Barnstar
For getting Stella Gibbons up to FA status. Excellent work! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Doc. That's the first star of this kind of seen, a welcome addition to the collection. Brianboulton (talk) 22:45, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed I've only given you special barnstars and while it is very true it is nice to have some variation! 79 FAs is incredible.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I neglected, in the moment, to congratulate you on the promotion of Gibbons. Well done.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Tree (part II)

I've taken the liberty of replacing the existing tree graphic in your sandbox with a new one with a different layout allowing a clearer typeface. The snag is it now sandwiches text between the tree and the caricature of Lord Redesdale, though a bit of juggling might fix that. Pray ponder whether you think it an improvement and add in main article if preferred. Tim riley (talk) 14:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

It is a great graphic. See what I've (tentatively) done on the article page, which is basically (a) a reduction of the chart to 260px, which is the largest I can make the chart without disturbing the section headings layout – something that it always distresses me to see – and (b) moving Bertie's image down to the next subsection – less relevant to him, but he's still a factor in the text. This gets rid of the text squeezing. My nagging doubt is whether readers, being generally used to family tree graphics of the vertical kind, will have difficulty interpreting this one. Will they easily understand the various cousinly relationships – or will they think that, because Churchill appears above them, he was an ancestor of the sisters? Before any final decision, is it possible to see what the traditional chart would look like, with the expanded information on? If it is simply impossible, then so be it; and your efforts are greatly appreciated and you shouldn't feel under any obligation to give more time to this. Brianboulton (talk) 18:04, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
You cannot imagine how much I enjoy pottering about with such things, so let's have no talk of "obligation". You can see the latest text of the chart in the conventional layout in your sandpit, which I have once again invaded most improperly. The revised old one is immediately under the newer version to show you the difference. I know which I prefer, but it's your article! Tim riley (talk) 21:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Incidentally, loth as one is to praise our common acquaintance of info-box notoriety, he gave me the very helpful advice that with the vast number of differently sized screens on which readers look at WP, it is in truth beside the point whether the layout looks good on your own screen when you're putting the page together. I mostly use a 14 inch laptop, which being so wide tends to sandwiching, whereas when I crank up my elderly desktop there are no sandwiches, not even for ready money. The same goes for headings etc. Tim riley (talk) 22:00, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I honestly can't decide just yet. I am giving the alternative an airing in the sandbox and will leave it there for a few days - there's no hurry, this article won't see much daylight until after Christmas. Again much thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 22:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Nancy Mitford 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:
  • ref> The pair met in the summer of 1928 and became unofficially engaged, despite his homosexuality (of which Nancy may not have been aware.<ref>Thompson, pp. 94–95</ref> Against a backdrop of advice

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:48, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Ringing a Peale

You may be interested in knowing I have just laid Franklin Peale, of whom you have heard much, at PR here. He turns out to have been quite the character, from one of Philadelphia's famous (and somewhat eccentric) families.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

...and, being an officer of the Mint, he probably died an inconvenient death, as was evidently the norm. I am currently finishing a marathon review on Netherlandish painting and have started another, on Hattie Jacques, in response to a request – this is a much shorter operation, and I imagine I'll be able to get to Peale by about Thursday. Brianboulton (talk) 17:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Actually, it seems he died comfortably in bed. Go figure. Thanks, no hurry whatsoever.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I have now laid it at FAC. Be aware that it is expanded somewhat from when you reviewed as I have been able to get some most interesting sources in on Mr. Peale.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

I read your interview with Wehwalt with great interest and pleasure. A worthy subject worthily treated. Loud applause! Tim riley (talk) 19:00, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks

The Premium Reviewer Barnstar
For the marathon review of Early Netherlandish Painting and for your tireless and close reviews of so many articles. Many thanks! We're lucky to have you around! Victoria (talk) 12:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

A very generous comment, and a particularly handsome star! Brianboulton (talk) 21:05, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Mensa

Latin for "O, table!" Revised table now uploaded for your consideration. I was a touch uncertain of the lines you wanted to the left of and below the Stanley box, which pray check. Colours can be adjusted ad lib. Alterations, tattooes, ear-piercings and tooth extractions done while you wait. Tim riley (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice to see that the vocative case is alive and well; we were told to disregard it. On the diagram, woweeee, that's an improvement! A few points:
  • The link line from David Ogilvy to Angus Ogilvy should be solid - he is a direct descendant. To clarify this, I think we should replace the "Ogilvy line" message with a box reading "Earls of Airlie"
  • The "Stanleys" box should be connected only to the David Ogilvy box – no downward dotted line. The box is only included because I refer to the Stanley connection in the text, and it will be useful to have it illustrated.
  • Since space is not now an issue, can the downward lines be extended just a bit, to give the boxes a bit less clutter?
  • Again, as we have the full page width at our disposal, do we need to "thumb" it at all – why not use the full-size image? Is there some MOS restriction against that?
  • Not decided about the colours yet.

When you have time, could you look at these points? Brianboulton (talk) 22:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Nancy Mitford

I have sent you an email with an extract from the diaries of James Lees-Milne about Mitford's dying days. It may or may not be of use, but I mention it here knowing that your email service is dodgy. I can post it here (it isn't very long) if wanted. Tim riley (talk) 17:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I see the email is in the box – but I can't open it, the bugger. Please could you post it here? I imagine it has to do with the deathbead letters she wrote to JLM, making jokes about her will, etc, as reported in the Thompson biography, but I'd like to see a fuller wording if possible. Brianboulton (talk) 18:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
JL-M’s diary entry for 31 May 1973 (Ancient as the Hills: Diaries 1973-1974), viz
By this morning's post I receive a letter from Nancy, still in her firm hand, but misspelt and shaky, and piteous. It begins, 'It's very curious dying and would have many a drole amusing & charming side were it not for the pain. We had screams over the Will. The Dame's share. "but she'll be furious if she only gets that."' Then she says the doctors are so tiresome they will not give her a date for her death. They merely say 'Have everything you want', meaning as much morphia. I have been haunted by this letter all day. Extraordinary that someone on the threshold of death can write like this, and still make jokes.
The Dame, by the way, was Nancy's nickname for Alvilde Lees-Milne. Odd to use it to her hubby, and I know not what Alvide had reason to expect from Nancy's will. Have asked my correspondent for a page number. Tim riley (talk) 18:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nancy Mitford, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West End (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) 09:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Viscount

Hello Brian, I do hope you are well. I'm just dropping you a line to let you know that I've nominated Air Rhodesia Flight 825 for FA. This was one of the uglier incidents of the Rhodesian war: ZIPRA fighters downed a civilian plane and shot most of the survivors with machine guns (some of the passengers survived by hiding before the attackers reached the crash site). Rhodesia reacted by flattening guerrilla positions in Zambia and Mozambique, apparently killing a lot of refugees while doing so. If you're interested and at a loose end, I'd very much appreciate any suggestions you might have. The review is here. All the very best, —Cliftonian (talk) 18:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I'm rarely at a loose end these days, more's the pity. All I can say is that I will get there, though it may be several days before I do – hopefully before Christmas when I will be absent for a few days. Brianboulton (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I look forward to it. I hope you're well and having a good run-up to Christmas. It takes some getting used to that here in Israel it is just 25 December for most people. —Cliftonian (talk) 21:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

Chaplin FAC

Hi Brian - the FAC nomination for Chaplin has been instigated, it would be great if you are able to chip in. Hope you're well, --Loeba (talk) 17:58, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

That was so kind of you to do the source review, major thanks. I have one question though - regarding the Norwegian and French sources, I'm not entirely sure how this is done. Is there a special template, or do you just add e.g. "In Norwegian" at the end? I thought I'd ask here instead of the FAC page just to ensure you saw the question. Merry Christmas by the way! :) --Loeba (talk) 14:31, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
There may be templates for this, I don't know. I normally just add (in French) - or whatever the language - at the end of the ref. Brianboulton (talk) 14:46, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

The Seasonal Netherlandish Barnstar of Cultural Transcendence
Thanks for the incredible effort you made at the Early Netherlandish painting PR - that was some review, and we have a *far* better page now as a result. Sincere best wishes and hope you have a good christmas. Ceoil (talk) 15:43, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays...

Happy Holidays
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too Brian!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:46, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

From London

St. Paul's Cathedral...
Merry Christmas, Brian, and a very happy new year! Voceditenore

Merry Christmas

Holiday Cheer
Victuallers talkback is wishing Brian Season's Greetings! Thanks, this is just to celebrate the holiday season and promote WikiLove, 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 by this - you could do the same. ... and I see you have Brian

Best wishes

Thanks for the note, Brian, and Merry Christmas to you, too. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:35, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

FA Review

Hi Brian, Thanks for commenting on the St James' Church, Sydney article that I have been working on for so long and finally nominated for FA. I have now added lots (and lots) of references as you wanted. As a long-term quiet admirer of your work, I am hoping that you think it is now up to standard. When you get a chance, could you have a look please? Happy Christmas! Whiteghost.ink (talk) 04:16, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I will certainly read the article with interest – but it will have to be after the holiday, as time is in exceedingly short supply at present. So give me a few days. Christmas greetings to you, too, no doubt a warm one. Brianboulton (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Thanks for the kind message. A Merry Christmas to you and yours as well. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

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 ><>°° 23:18, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nancy Mitford, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Princess Alexandra, Christopher Sykes and Peter Fleming (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) 08:55, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year on this foggy Christmas Eve. Finetooth (talk) 00:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy holidays

 Happy Holidays!

Victoria

Stella again

I imagine you have seen this from The Guardian, but I mention it here just in case. Rather pleasing, I thought. Tim riley (talk) 13:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Pleasing indeed – I hadn't seen it, as I only take The Guardian on Saturdays these days, and I rarely read it online. You don't often find the words "excellent" and "Wikipedia" in the same sentence in the press. I wonder if the mention will raise a spike on the daily viewings, averaging around 100–120. Thanks for bringing it to my notice. Brianboulton (talk) 14:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

Keith Johnson

You raised a good question. As the author is a missed user (3 years), you are probably best qualified to fix it yourself. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Heh...

Interesting Ealdgyth - Talk 23:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Very, very interesting – many thanks! When I was working on the Ross Sea party article I was aware of the shortage of images relating to that expedition – hardly any, in fact. It will be fascinating if the rest of the discoveries are published. It seems a long time ago that I was writing that stuff, but it's still a compelling area and, who knows, I might be tempted one day to resume my role as polar historian. Brianboulton (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Eliot's A Song for Simeon

I nominated A Song for Simeon for FAC, located here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/A Song for Simeon/archive1. I would be grateful if you had some time to stop by and offer some comments and suggestions for its improvement. I hope the holidays went well. Best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2014!--ColonelHenry (talk) 00:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Hugh Walpole

I have finally got Hugh Walpole up for peer review, and if you have time and disposition to look in, I shall be in your debt. Quite understand if not, naturally, and there is not the slightest rush in any case. – Tim riley (talk) 16:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Excellent timing, for I am shortly to ask you for the same favour with regard to Nancy Mitford, which will hit peer review in a couple of days. I will certainly do the honours for Walpole. Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brianboulton/Archive72&oldid=1090490257"