User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 110

Archive 105

←

Archive 108

Archive 109

Archive 110

Source reviewing at FAC

@FAC coordinators: : I have posted a guidance essay, User:Brianboulton/Guidance on source reviewing at FAC, intended to assist potential sources reviewers (there's a link within the massive talkpage thread on WT:FAC but you'll have a job finding it). If you think that this essay could significantly help potential reviewers, you may want to consider giving a more prominent link somewhere on WT:FAC.

My main purpose in opening that thread was, as I say in its second paragraph, to encourage other editors to share the burden of FAC source reviewing, which I have carried more or less alone for some time. Regrettably, the thread soon descended into a forum of "opinions" from editors, so I'm not holding my breath that much will come of that discussion although perhaps a few consciences might be pricked. For myself, I need (and will be taking) a complete break from source reviewing, for some considerable while. I hope that this will not impact too badly on the FAC process, but I fear that if I keep on, other editors will simply leave me to it as they have done in the past. Brianboulton (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Brian, yes I did have a hard time finding the link in the sea of text at WT:FAC... I have really appreciated your diligence and plain hard work source reviewing, particularly lately when you have shouldered such a high proportion of the burden. It's great that you've been able to create an essay to pass on the knowledge and encourage others, I'll be keen to take a look at this guidance myself. Thanks again for your efforts. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Brian - I found the essay very useful indeed in relation to André Messager and only hope I didn’t miss too much. And it is indeed a labour. Thanks very much indeed for all those that you have done. With best regards. KJP1 (talk) 21:57, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Dementia with Lewy bodies

Brainy Brian, I have completely rewritten DLB, and if I can find some independent, third-party sources for writing the "History" section, it could be close to FAC ready. Eric, Ceoil, Johnbod and Colin are combing through the prose now, and I've asked Nikki to look at the images. I know you are worn out on source reviews, but this article uses exclusively very recent secondary reviews (except for one, Neef 2006, and I am looking for a new source for that) and NIH pages, so I am hoping it will be an easy one, in case you are interested in having a look. The only part that doesn't use MEDRS sources is the Society and Culture stuff. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:47, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Sandy. I have "retired" myself from regular sources reviewing for the time being, but I will always be prepared to help in a few special cases where old friends and accomplices are involved. I'll be happy to check out the sources for this article when it comes to FAC. A quick glance indicates that there are unlikely to be many problems. Brianboulton (talk) 19:42, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Brainy one :) Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

French goings-on

Bonjour de Paris! (wishful thinking: it's de Islington, truth to tell). M. André Messager is now at FAC, and if you are minded to look in and comment it will be esteemed a favour. Tim riley talk 15:23, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Ferrier discography

I warned an IP that the MANY edits break the syntax but they keep going. I feel like loosing patience soon. - Some of the info seems actually useful but tough to hunt for that among a heap of broken link etc. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't have the time to maintain discographies. Are the IP's edits doing significant damage to the list, or is it a case of just being rather annoying? Brianboulton (talk) 17:46, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I can't tell, because I don't know her recordings well enough. To me, it looks like someone who knows details, but has no idea about wiki markup and destroys links, for example. If you see the same, perhaps you could talk them into suggesting on the talk, and someone familiar with wiki editing adds?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

bengal

Brian, I believe I have addressed all your issues. Revisit? Thanks! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:00, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 27

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• New collections
  • Alexander Street (expansion)
  • Cambridge University Press (expansion)
• User Group
• Global branches update
  • Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
• Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese 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) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Ford Piquette Avenue Plant FAC

Thanks for doing a source review of my successful FAC nomination for the Carolwood Pacific Railroad article. On that note, I created an FAC nomination for the Ford Piquette Avenue Plant article here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ford Piquette Avenue Plant/archive1. If willing, I would like you to also do a source review for this one. I read your message on the FAC talk page regarding reluctance for doing source reviews on FAC nominations that fail and get archived, but that's not something you have to worry about with me. Prior to this FAC nomination, all four pieces of featured content that I have nominated in the past got promoted on the first attempt. Any input that you would be willing to provide will of course be welcomed, but a source review is what is needed most. Thanks in advance. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 16:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm generally having a break from source reviewing at the moment, just doing the odd one or two. However, I'll keep an eye on your FAC and maybe review it after it's got another support, unless someone else gets in first. Brianboulton (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

• From the editors: The Signpost's presses roll again

• Signpost: Future directions for The Signpost

• News and notes: Photo of Kim Jong-un. Stephen Hawking death tops hits on many Wikipedias.

• In the media: The rise of Wikipedia as a disinformation mop

• In focus: Admin reports board under criticism

• Special report: ACTRIAL results adopted by landslide

• Opinion: Guideline for Organization Notability revised

• Op-ed: World War II Myth-making and Wikipedia

• Community view: It's time we look past Women in Red to counter systemic bias

• Discussion report: The future of portals

• Arbitration report: No new cases, and one motion on administrative misconduct

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Military History

• Blog: Why the world reads Wikipedia

• Humour: Our Favorite Places to Whine About Stuff

• Traffic report: A quiet place to wrestle with the articles of March

• Technology report: Coming soon: Books-to-PDF, interactive maps, rollback confirmation

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Gallery: A look at some famous and not as well-known border tripoints

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Guy Burgess

Only somewhat adjacently connected, but in your work on him, did you come across / use any general histories of the left / spying / CPGB during the 20s and 30s at all? Stuff for general context and background (and, particularly likely to mention this chap, perhaps?) I hope you're keeping well, Brianboulton, and thanks for all your help elsewhere. —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 19:52, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I've come across Glading, although his story does not interconnect with that of Burgess. There's quite a lot about him in one of my source books, Richard Davenport-Hines's Enemies Within (Collins, 2018) – there's even a photograph of him! If you're writing up the Glading article I would suggest you borrow this book from your library; it's rather expensive otherwise. Brianboulton (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that Brianboulton; I'll be using the library as I don't need a full-time copy of it, but, in case you're interested, the price seems to have dropped—at least one copy is only £13. It's interesting isn't, how the Soviets recruited at both ends of the social spectrum; Burgess et al. in Camridge and Whitehall, Glading on the factory floor? Cheers! —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 10:30, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the "factory floor" communists were initially a fruitful ground for Soviet recruitment. Then in the 1930s Arnold Deutsch ("Otto") was specifically charged with recruiting the bright young men from the universities, who might rise to positions of influence in the British establishment, so the emphasis changed. Brianboulton (talk) 10:44, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Guy Burgess – to peer reviewers and others

Wehwalt; AustralianRupert; Ceoil; Serial Number 54129; Tim riley; DavidCane; Johnbod; Iridescent

I'm notifying all the peer reviewers, above, (and anyone else interested in Burgess) that the article is now at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Guy Burgess/archive1. Brianboulton (talk) 14:37, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Already been there. I will say I found your discussion with Mr Holtzman most interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

The Diary of a Nobody

Good morning Brianboulton,
I am referring to you since you seem to have actively contributed to the above mentioned article.
The reference to The Diary of a Nobody, Introduction, 1969, p. 7-10 is used quite often. Would you kindly let me know which edition is concerned, since there is no trace of it in the bibliography.
Please use, if you may, my French talk page (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_utilisateur:Robert_Ferrieux)
Many thanks and very best wishes, Robert Ferrieux (talk) 06:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. The article cites the Introduction from the 1969 Folio Society edition (ref 1), and the publisher's note from the 1910 J.W. Arrowsmith edition (refs 22 and 23). The WorldCat details for the 1969 edition are shown here, and for the 1910 edition here These details should have been included in the article bibliography, and I will add the necessary information.

I've not looked at the article for several years. I see that numerous unformatted citations have been added, and I suspect other damage - I'll check the whole article as soon as possible. Brianboulton (talk) 23:15, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Inspired me to dig out my copy—great stuff! Man, I gotta get me a straw pith helmet for Margate. —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap shit room} 15:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

TFA for June 26, 2018

Hi, just letting you know I've scheduled C. R. M. F. Cruttwell as TFA for 26 June 2018. Hope you're doing well.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:10, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have a few doubts about this one – not my finest hour, I think – but I am upgrading and improving it, and I hope it will be ready to show by 26 June. Brianboulton (talk) 14:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for "this sad and cautionary little tale", introducing "Poor, unfortunate Crutters! A respected academic historian, fine war record, dean of an Oxford college at 33 – what could go wrong? Well, in 1922 he had the misfortune to meet, and fall out with, the young Evelyn Waugh, a resourceful and unforgiving enemy. For the next 17 years the name "Cruttwell" was introduced repeatedly into Waugh's novels and stories, always as a nasty or ridiculous character – a burglar, a homicidal maniac, a toady, a dishonest cubmaster. Followers of Waugh scanned each new novel to see how Cruttwell would be represented, as did Cruttwell himself. His various academic publications and achievements are almost entirely forgotten, and the man behind them has quite disappeared; he is only remembered as a comic literary footnote." - Looking forward to Percy Grainger! - I prefer celebrating birthdays (Volker David Kirchner, Claus Wisser) to recent reaths, - too many. Enoch zu Guttenberg should have conducted Verdi's Requiem tomorrow for the RMF, - it will be performed in his memory. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

A thank you

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		Thanks very much for helping to review Mowbray—thanks to your helpful suggestions, it passed. I appreciate you taking the time and trouble to look in. Cheers! —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 14:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Guy Burgess source review

Brian - trying to edit on an iPad on a train, despite telling myself never to do that! I’ve made a complete cock and messed up your message. Long and short, I’d be delighted. Will reply properly when home. KJP1 (talk) 17:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC) KJP1 (talk) 17:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Apologies - work took a turn for the worse the last two days. Shall start this weekend. KJP1 (talk) 16:47, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I wonder

if you might have a quick look at this conversation from earlier and give an opinion...? If you wouldn't mind; shouldn't take long. Hope all's well—cheers! —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 17:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

I have sources relating to Glading and could possibly help there if required, though not immediately. Which reminds me – have you finished with the Burgess FAC? Brianboulton (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

That's a very kind offer, thanks BB. A bit of a bookend to Burgess! The main point was the suggestion that is ready to present at FAC; thoughts?

I'm really sorry about the Burgess review—I admit, I totally forgot—due in part, ironically, because I got completely bogged down in trying to trace that "Wanted" poster's provenance, per Nikkimaria's comments. I still don't really understand how it's able to be hosted at Commons, to be honest, if there are questions as to its copyright—they're usually stricter than we are. Anyway. end result = no luck I'm afraid, so I achieved nothing more than forgetting to come back. Sorry about that! —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 10:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

A lot of inadequately licenced stuff finds its way into Commons. They are far from strict there; it's generally only at FAC that image licencing is properly reviewed (maybe GAN also but I don't review there), and Wikipedia's interpretation of US copyright law is notoriously strict. There's dozens of images I would have loved to have used in my articles, but had to forgo because they would never have got past Nikki! Brianboulton (talk) 14:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I'll have to bear that in mind—I assumed they were stricter due to the "No fair use" policy. —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 15:25, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

• From the editor: Another issue meets the deadline

• Op-ed: Has the wind gone out of the AdminShip's sails?

• Opinion: Integrating my many lives on Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Portals

• Discussion report: User rights, infoboxes, and more discussion on portals

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Arbitration report: Managing difficult topics

• News and notes: Lots of Wikimedia

• In the media: Wikipedia in Turkish politics; COI politics in Wikipedia; most cited work

• Traffic report: We love our superheroes

• Technology report: A trove of contributor and developer goodies

• Blog: Why I write about women on Wikipedia

• Recent research: Why people don't contribute to Wikipedia; using Wikipedia to teach statistics, technical writing, and controversial issues

• Humour: Play with your food

• Gallery: Wine not?

• From the archives: The Signpost scoops The Signpost

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Percy Grainger scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the Percy Grainger article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 8, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 8, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:16, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. I'll refresh the article (I've not looked at it for a while) and edit the blurb if necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 18:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for doing justice to the person, described "As a composer and performer, Percy Grainger was a bit of an oddity who ultimately, perhaps, delivered less than he at one time promised. He was innovative and original, yet most of his musical ideas failed to catch on; he tends to be remembered for relatively trivial works such as the eminently whistlable "Country Gardens"."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

WikiJournal of Humanities

For the sake of openness, this is the email I've received concerning the WikiJournal of Humanities. I share Iridescent's view that such discussion should take place on talk pages rather than via private email. I have nothing to add to the extensive thread that has developed on Iridescent's talk page.

"I recently came across the raft of high-quality Wikipedia articles that you've worked on.

Would you be interested in putting it (or any other article) though external, academic peer review for publication in the WikiJournal of Humanities (wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJHum)? It's an academic journal in the same format as the medical journal www.WikiJMed.org.

It couples the rigour of academic peer review with the extreme reach of the encyclopedia. It is therefore an excellent way to achieve public engagement, outreach and impact public understanding of science. Peer-reviewed articles are dual-published both as standard academic PDFs, as well as directly into Wikipedia. This improves the scientific accuracy of the encyclopedia, and rewards academics with citable, indexed publications. It also provides much greater reach than is normally achieved through traditional scholarly publishing.

Anyway, let me know whether you'd be interested in putting an article through academic peer review (either solo, or with a team of coauthors). Alternatively, if you would prefer to write on a different topic, we may be able to accommodate you.

All the best, Thomas"

Brianboulton (talk) 10:03, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 28

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

• #1Bib1Ref
• New partners
  • Rock's Backpages
  • Invaluable
  • Termsoup
• User Group update
• Global branches update
  • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
• Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, 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) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Mud March

Hi Brian, As you may have seen, I have been working on the Mud March‎ article recently, tweaking and altering some of what was there before, and adding and removing where I felt appropriate. I would like to take this article to PR (and possibly FAC) at some stage, and would like you to consider working as a co-nominator when we think the article is in the right shape. I have also opened the same offer to Sarah for her to consider, and I think if the three of us manage to focus our efforts on the article, it could be an excellent example of the standard that suffrage articles can reach. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:11, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The article's text has changed quite a bit from my draft version of several months back, generally for the better, I think. I'm not sure there's much more that I can contribute; you and Sarah are much better informed on the subject than I am, and it would be great if you can work together. It's a less contentious topic than the Black Friday demonstration, so a cordial collaboration should be feasible. I'll watch the page. Brianboulton (talk) 14:15, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Death on the Ice

Hi Mr. Boulton, my name is Hayward Keats; I’ve taken an interest in Wikipedia since 2005. I have created some articles in Wikipedia, albeit very amateurish compared to those articles you and Mr. Riley create and edit. Those that I have created is my effort to allow Wikipedia readers to learn of my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I came across some of your work a number of years ago and have watched you develop these articles into tremendous encyclopaedic works. I note your interest in Artic explorers, classical musicians/artist and articles of little known tragedy of human endurance & suffering. It was the article on the Last voyage of the Karluk and the heroic efforts of Captain Robert Bartlett that I became interested in following your work.

I was concerned a year or two ago that you and Mr. Riley would leave Wikipedia; I’m extremely glad you both stayed and continue to write for Wikipedia.

I know it’s a bit odd to receive a request such as this, I would ask that you consider writing an article on a controversial tragedy from my little corner of the world, Newfoundland. It is a tragedy that every Newfoundlander knows quite well, the death of 78 sealers of the 1914 Newfoundland Sealing Disaster; Cassie Brown in her book entitled Death on the Ice covers the story.

Thank you for your time and consideration on this request, Hayward. HJKeats (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Hayward, for your note and kind words. I'm still contributing to the project but to a much lesser extent than a few years back. I don't write so many articles now, and those I'm currently working on tend to be on subjects where I did the main research a while ago. I'm not really taking on brand new projects at present. However, the sealing tragedy does look like an interesting and worthwhile study, and it may be a topic I'd be prepared to consider later. With all good wishes, Brianboulton (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Mr. Boulton for considering my request, I look forward to reading more of your work. Thanks again, Hayward. HJKeats (talk) 10:01, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

hi

Just wanted to make sure you saw my revisions here and ensure that the reformatted reference is adequate? Thank you! Chetsford (talk) 04:50, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

John/Eleanor Rykener

Brianboulton. I wasn't sure whether to eave you a message regarding this—or, indeed, whether I would be able to without sounding sarcastic  :) but taking your opinions as ever to heart (see what I mean?!) John/Eleanore received a pretty thorough GA, and also per your suggestion, is now at PR. I hope you won't be offended at the slight delay in letting you know. It would be a privilege if you'd look in; if you're too busy, no problem. Have a good weekend, in any case. —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 18:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. If you keep the PR open for a few more days I'll definitely take a look, and comment. Brianboulton (talk) 19:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 June 2018

• From the editor: The Admin Ship is still barely afloat, while a Foundation project risks sinking

• Special report: NPR and AfC – The Marshall Plan: an engagement and a marriage?

• Op-ed: What do admins do?

• Opinion: Google isn't responsible for Wikipedia's mistakes

• News and notes: Money, milestones, and Wikimania

• In the media: Much wikilove from the Mayor of London, less from Paekākāriki or a certain candidate for U.S. Congress

• Discussion report: Deletion, page moves, and an update to the main page

• Featured content: New promotions

• Arbitration report: WWII, UK politics, and a user deCrat'ed

• Traffic report: Endgame

• Technology report: Improvements piled on more improvements

• Gallery: Wiki Loves Africa

• Blog: Wikipedia should be open for editors in Turkey

• Recent research: How censorship can backfire and conversations can go awry

• Humour: Television plot lines

• Wikipedia essays: This month's pick by The Signpost editors

• From the archives: Wolves nip at Wikipedia's heels: A perspective on the cost of paid editing

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Archive 105

←

Archive 108

Archive 109

Archive 110