User talk:Bertaut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Blake Update 1[edit]

1795-William-Blake-Naomi-entreating-Ruth-Orpah.jpg
Naomi entreating Ruth and Orpah to return to the land of Moab.
William Blake Archive GLAM Update #1

Check out the first update on the GLAM-Wiki cooperation with William Blake Archive and the William Blake Task Force, Sadads (talk) 21:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


This is a transclusion from Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry/William Blake/Updates/Update 1/Announce. If you would not like to receive future messages about Blake GLAM-Wiki, please remove yourself from Wikipedia:Blake#Members. This update was distributed by User:Sadads
For Children The Gates of Paradise copy D object 1.jpg
Blake's illustration from For Children The Gates of Paradise

DYK for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine: The Fallen[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Invisible Barnstar Hires.png The Invisible Barnstar
For all the "useless information" you've added to iOS articles, and more. Sociallyacceptable (talk) 22:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Haha. Thanks very much. Very much appreciated. Bertaut (talk) 00:28, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Bertaut. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You've got mail[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Bertaut. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Sociallyacceptable (talk) 21:26, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I tried merging but I failed so can you do it?[edit]

I did try merging Guy (Street Fighter) into Guy (Final Fight). But my previous attempts by using the merge template seem to fall flat so can you do it please?Dwanyewest (talk) 23:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dwayne. Are you sure you have the right person? I've never done any work on either of those articles. Bertaut (talk) 00:00, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter[edit]

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Video game reviews[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Bertaut. You have new messages at Cky2250's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CKY2250 ταικ 01:30, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)[edit]

Books & Bytes

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

Sign up for monthly delivery

Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world.

Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations...

Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...

Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...

Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...

Read Books & Bytes

The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs) 16:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey[edit]

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 15:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Just wondering...[edit]

...but have I broken anything in my edit to Temple Run? George8211 02:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. The only thing you did was adding a </ref> before the cite web template broke all of the "AboutImangi" references. If you look, you'll see that the </ref> comes after the template not before it. It's not a big deal, easy mistake to make, and fix. Which I did! Thanks for taking the time to ask. Bertaut (talk) 03:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Seasons Greeting to you and yours[edit]

A Boy was Born[edit]

I read with interest what you just mentioned about Blake and his works. Do you think it is relevant to A Boy was Born? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:36, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. Well, the thing with Blake is that, by modern standards, both his punctuation and capitalisation are really all over the place, far more than 99% of other authors of the period, so it was agreed amongst Blake editors long before I arrived on the scene to maintain his stylistic nuances, as to "modernise" everything would distort his work far too much. That's why modern editions of his poetry maintain his style (as opposed to modern editions of his contemporaries, which tend to use modern punctuation/capitalisation). A good comparison is Shakespeare. If we take, say, Richard II. It was originally published as "The Tragedie of King Richard the second", and then published as "The life and death of King Richard the Second". However, unlike with Blake, these were publishing conventions, not authorial choices (Blake published most of his own material himself), and I think that is a key point. With A Boy was Born, my feeling would be that "was" shouldn't be capitalised, as that seems to have been the author's own preference, but I don't think it's as clear-cut a case as we tend to see with Blake. Bertaut (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
My feeling is that I don't even care (any more) so much about how our article is named, but what is said in the text, where attempts have been made to eliminate the composer's version as undue weight. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
I certainly think noting that it was published as A Boy was Born is justified if the title of the article is A Boy Was Born. To again use Shakespeare as an example, the vast majority of articles that I know of include title variants somewhere in the article. In the ones I've worked on, I usually put them in the "Date and text" section (see for example Titus Andronicus#Date and text or Henry VI, Part 3#Date and text). However, if you look at the lede of the three Henry VI plays, you'll see all three include "often written as "X Henry VI" right in the first sentence. The long and short of it is this: if the piece was originally published as "A Boy was Born", if that was the authorial preference, and the article is using the form "A Boy Was Born", I think it's perfectly reasonable to mention this in the lede, especially given the fact that there are two references. Bertaut (talk) 17:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Taming of the Shrew[edit]

Why did you undo this edit? There are no citations in the passage suggesting an earlier than 1593. 175.38.214.104 (talk) 21:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I undid it for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we're using the Oxford Chronology in the article, and limiting the date to 1593-1594 would throw the chronology out of whack, as we know for pretty much a certainty that the Henry VI plays were written in 1591/1592. Secondly, Taming of the Shrew is arguably the most difficult play in the canon to date, which is why we've gone with a four year time-span as opposed to a narrower period. However, if we were to narrow the date down, it would be earlier rather than later. The main problem, besides the existence of A Shrew, is the difficulty of establishing a terminus post quem. However, if you look here, you'll see Kier Elam posits 1591 as such a date. Ann Thompson and H.J. Oliver both also date the play to 1591/1592. Stephen Roy Miller on the other hand dates it 1591-1594. I haven't read the 2012 Barbara Hodgdon Arden edition, but from what I hear, she doesn't say a great deal on the issue of date. But you're quite right about the lack of citations. The references to Olivier (note 18) and Miller (note 21) do cover the dating issue, but you're correct, there needs to be something more specific in the passage. I'll add something as soon as I get a chance. Bertaut (talk) 01:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
For your contribution to Hysteria Project2 Mr RD 16:56, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Very much appreciated. Bertaut (talk) 01:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue[edit]

Books & Bytes

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

Volume 1 Issue 3, December/January 2013

(Sign up for monthly delivery)

Happy New Year, and welcome to a special double issue of Books & Bytes. We've included a retrospective on the changes and progress TWL has seen over the last year, the results of the survey TWL participants completed in December, some of our plans for the future, a second interview with a Wiki Love Libraries coordinator, and more. Here's to 2014 being a year of expansion and innovation for TWL!

The Wikipedia Library completed the first 6 months of its Individual Engagement grant last week. Here's where we are and what we've done:
Increased access to sources: 1500 editors signed up for 3700 free accounts, individually worth over $500,000, with usage increases of 400-600%
Deep networking: Built relationships with Credo, HighBeam, Questia, JSTOR, Cochrane, LexisNexis, EBSCO, New York Times, and OCLC
New pilot projects: Started the Wikipedia Visiting Scholar project to empower university-affiliated Wikipedia researchers
Developed community: Created portal connecting 250 newsletter recipients, 30 library members, 3 volunteer coordinators, and 2 part-time contractors
Tech scoped: Spec'd out a reference tool for linking to full-text sources and established a basis for OAuth integration
Broad outreach: Wrote a feature article for Library Journal's The Digital Shift; presenting at the American Library Association annual meeting
...Read Books & Bytes!

Shakespeare review[edit]

Can you check out this new content.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

this too--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
this also--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
That all looks fine. I've made a couple of minor changes. On Midsummer, I moved Demetrius from "Other characters" to "Lovers". I also added Lysander. I know there's no article on him, but having five of the six lovers looks a little strange. Feel free to delete him if you think that best. You might also consider adding A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy. As for Shrew, I moved Il Bisbetico Domato from "Direct adaptations" to "Other adaptations". That's it. Thanks for the heads up. Bertaut (talk) 20:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I just ask that you take a serious look at the changes that I am making. Don't just be nice to me and let me stick crap in these templates. This is Shakespeare. We can't be a credible encyclopedia if we screw up Shakespeare. --TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Have a look at this one.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Most of them look fine. I moved "Ariel's Song" from the adaptations section to the phrases section. Technically, it's not a phrase, but it's certainly not an adaptation. My one question would be The Tempest Musical. Not so much its inclusion in the template per se, but its inclusion on Wikipedia at all. Apart from the fact that it's very poorly written, it includes no sources and it has the wrong title (it's actually called The Tempest: A Musical). A quick Google search reveals next to nothing about it, and it certainly isn't referred to in any academic material of which I'm aware. When you consider some of the legendary productions of Shakespeare's plays that don't have articles on Wikipedia, I see little reason why this minor adaptation should. Bertaut (talk) 21:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I am not judging articles for AFD, I just looked at it and said if the article is on WP, it should be on the template. I have no qualms with its deletion.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I think I'll throw it up for deletion. Bertaut (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Troilus and Cressida[edit]

I was wondering if you would look at Troilus and Cressida, Troilus and Criseyde and Troilus and Cressida (opera) and all the related works and make some sort of sensible template. I think that one is above my level of expertise.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm fairly busy off-wiki this week, but I'll certainly take a look. At a quick glance, we'd certainly be able to do a decent character section. There'd be at least one source and two adaptations (the opera and the BBC adaptation), and whatever is appropriate for a related section. I'll give you a shout as soon as I've had a chance to check it out properly. Bertaut (talk) 01:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

New templates[edit]

Here are two new templates for your review:

{{Coriolanus}}
{{Measure for Measure}}--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Coriolanus (2013 play) may be a merge or deletion candidate.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Made a couple of minor changes. I switched fictional and historical characters around in Coriolanus; it just seemed to make more sense to have the historical characters above the fictional ones, no biggie one way or the other though. Also added the BBC production to the adaptations and Parallel Lives to sources. With Measure for Measure, I dated the adaptations and, again, added the BBC one. And I moved The Law Against Lovers from related to adaptations. Also added Bed trick to the related section, and added the template to the bed trick article. Bertaut (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
What did you think about the 2013 play?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

An outstanding issue[edit]

I hope you will comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Shakespeare#Much_Ado_About_Nothing_template.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 4[edit]

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 4, February 2014

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

News for February from your Wikipedia Library.

Donations drive: news on TWL's partnership efforts with publishers

Open Access: Feature from Ocaasi on the intersection of the library and the open access movement

American Library Association Midwinter Conference: TWL attended this year in Philadelphia

Royal Society Opens Access To Journals: The UK's venerable Royal Society will give the public (and Wikipedians) full access to two of their journal titles for two days on March 4th and 5th

Going Global: TWL starts work on pilot projects in other language Wikipedias

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Template progress[edit]

I am a bit confused on which ones you have done a final review of. {{King Lear}} and {{The Merchant of Venice}} no longer have {{underconstruction}}. {{Othello}} and {{Hamlet}} still have the template because I think you have yet to look them over. {{Romeo and Juliet}} still has the template because I am still at work on it. For Lear, I still wonder if the TV and film versions be separated and should opera be moved down to adaptations?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I haven't had a chance to look at Othello or Hamlet yet. The rest I've done, apart from R&J obviously. I need to take another look at subdividing Lear, which I should be able to do in a day or two. Bertaut (talk) 05:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Let me know if you want to do {{Macbeth}} because I feel like I am claiming all the elaborate ones. That one will take several days and may be bigger than R&J since the search result yields a longer list. I don't want you to feel I am hogging all the really elaborate ones. Also, on the other end of the spectrum, I think you might be able to make one for {{The Two Noble Kinsmen}}. There seem to be enough character links to justify a template although I don't know what else is out there.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
No, you can go ahead with Macbeth if you want, no problem. I'll cast an eye over Two Noble Kinsmen, All's Well and Pericles over the weekend, and see if I can cobble something together for them. Bertaut (talk) 20:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

All's Well That Ends Well[edit]

Are you sure about this edit?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:12, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't even remember doing that, but it does appear as if I screwed up alright! Obviously, All's Well, Ends Well and All's Well That Ends Well are two very different things! Bertaut (talk) 00:21, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I will leave it to you to undo your own mistake.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:00, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Template: The Two Noble Kinsmen[edit]

Thank you for your thanked post on Tempate: The Two Noble Kinsmen. Have a great day! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Cheers. You too. Bertaut (talk) 01:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Violence[edit]

Bertaut, please either cite your claim in Themes in Titus Andronicus that this is the most violent period in history, or qualify it as a claim. There is little to no evidence that it is true, so provide some. You have cited her describing the play's relevance, but you fail to cite the claim. Therealpirateblue (talk) 13:49, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you[edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Hello there. I know it's some time after the fact, but I have just finished reading the three Henry VI articles. Extraordinary work on your part. Well done. Five Antonios (talk) 01:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Greatly appreciated. Glad you found something of use in the articles. Bertaut (talk) 02:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 5[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 5, March 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

  • New Visiting Scholar positions
  • TWL Branch on Arabic Wikipedia, microgrants program
  • Australian articles get a link to librarians
  • Spotlight: "7 Reasons Librarians Should Edit Wikipedia"

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:54, 19 April 2014 (UTC)