I hereby grant this WikiPen to Tim riley for outstanding research and writing in connection with topics of musical and theatrical interest in the Victorian era, including his recent series of new and expanded articles on the early opera burlesques of W. S. Gilbert and the 1880s burlesques at the Gaiety Theatre, London. These articles represent by far the most complete source of information about these works available for free on the internet. -- 07:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
With Gianni Schicchi out of the way, and Henry J. Wood bound to follow soon, it is time to turn our thoughts to Fred. Are you still up for this? Please don't feel that you have to participate in this project if you'd rather be working on something else, though I think it will be fun to do. You can of course decide for yourself how big a contribution you are willing to make.
There is a mass of online material on Delius, which I am collating at present and will start to read shortly. At the same time I am supplementing my presently exiguous Delius library, via Abebooks and ILL. I am listing relevant sources in this sandbox. I have also begun what I usually do as the first stage of composer biogs, which is to prepare a comprehensive List of works as a separate article - in place of the partial listing incorporated into the present version of the article. I will also be searching out PD images. I'd like to think we could have something peer-reviewable by mid-January, but timescales are flexible. Brianboulton (talk) 12:49, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, but I can get a lot of their stuff via JSTOR etc. I have downloads of all the stuff linked to in that list I posted in your sandbox. Tim riley (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delius work in progress report
I thought I'd let you know how things are progressing at my end. Because of multiple commitments on and off wiki, and the great amount of material I am having to read (and re-read in many cases) I am a little behind my self-imposed schedule for completing the
musical analysis section. If you wish, you can follow my progress, tortuous though it is, here. I hope to have something posted to the article proper before the weekend, but my text will still need attention thereafter. I have prepared a detailed list of works which I will set up as a separate article later this week. I am also looking to amend and update the discography information. How are you getting on? Brianboulton (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add my congratulations re Wood and (of course) my hope that Delius will in due course join him in the firmament. Tim's work on behalf of British musicians is one of the present joys of Wikipedia; waiting in the wings are Beecham, Britten, Holst, Vaughan Wiliams, Michael Tippett and the forgotten genius of Edmund Rubbra - a feast in prospect. Could be a great year. Brianboulton (talk) 09:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And congrats from me as well. Now, how about moving the article's title (after another discussion on the Talk Page, of course!). (And, of the above musicians, I vote for Beecham and Britten, possibly Holst and, I suppose, Tippett.) --GuillaumeTell18:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll start the ball rolling on the talk page. Future articles? With much collaboration with and encouragement from Ssilvers I got Beecham to GA, and I am not, for now, inclined to nudge him any further. Britten, certainly; his article is pretty poor and he deserves better. I don't know enough about Holst, Rubbra or Tippett to feel competent to upgrade their articles. VW would be a definite prospect, though. Thanks to all of you for your support and contributions. Tim riley (talk) 18:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be happy to tackle Rubbra later this year. My knowledge of him has got rather stale, but as a student I was most enthusiastic, and I'm sure I can rekindle this. Brianboulton (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help at Paul Pyant. I threw him up because I wanted to link him in the Carousel article. It's a bit surprising that he did not have an article, because he has an five Olivier Award nominations, 2 Tony nominations and is a pretty prolific designer. I suspect that some of the operas he has designed have been world premieres, so the Opera project may want to give this article some attention. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See this week's Signpost: The Signpost asked FA regular User:DrKiernan to select the FA Choice of the week. He wrote:
Once again, all the articles are of the highest quality. I have chosen Henry Wood as my favorite this week because of the number, density and quality of references to off-line print sources. Who can fail to agree with Wood's wise words: "I do not like ladies playing the trombone or double bass, but they can play the violin!" However, I do find myself sympathising with the critic who described a third of Wood's audience at a performance of Schoenberg as hissing, another third "not hissing because it was laughing, and the remaining third ... too puzzled either to laugh or to hiss."
I cannot find enough exclamation marks to express my pride at being sometimes associated with the brilliant principal author of this article. Congratulations! -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved my (incomplete) Music section to the article page. Much of the prose may need revision when it is incorporated with yours, and much still remains to be written, particularly on reception (scarcely begun). I will be toiling away. The image choices and placements are provisional.
You will see that I have put an "Underconstruction" banner at the top of the article, and that should remain until we feel the article is ready for review. I have also prepared a List of works, linked to the main article in the Music section. I note you haven't been able to work on your draft recently - any problem with which I can help? Brianboulton (talk) 22:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Later): There needs to be a "Legacy" section; it will alas be rather short, since Fred's legacy is somewhat underwhelming in musical terms. But there are things to be said (e.g. the work of the Delius Society). Should this section follow the biography, or come after the Music section and conclude the article (my preference)? Do you want me to draft the section? Brianboulton (talk) 13:53, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely after the music as an envoi, I feel. Happy for you to draft. I'll send you anything useful I can find. More generally we shall need to standardise on ref format (happy to follow your preferences on this), -ise v -ize forms, and em v en dashes. To be done at the end of our drafting, perhaps, when all is in place and we can see what we have to marry up. Tim riley (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There'll be a lot of that kind of stuff to handle when our drafting is done. I will draft a legacy section. I also intend to precis or rewrite the current Recordings section, which is much overdetailed at present. Happy writing! Brianboulton (talk) 23:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ssilvers nominated you for this award. Thank you for contributions to the project, Great work and fantastic effort. Congratulations, and may you wear the Imperial Napoleonic crowns well. – SMasters (talk) 07:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the image and lead paragraph in the Billie Carleton article. I felt it needed an image but didn't know where to find one that was copyright free. Actually I would dearly love to add an image displayed on flickr, as it appears to show her in the black-georgette-over-silk-pyjamas number she wore to the Victory Ball. (According to one source this unique costume 'represented France'. The identification doesn't leap out at me, but then I wasn't there in 1918: to the contemporary mind, it may have been obvious.) Thanks again RLamb (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the missing Beecham page refs, except for ref 13 - I can't find this quote in Beecham's 1957/1975 book. Curiously, other Beecham comments rather contradict the quote; for example, p. 219: "Too much stress has been laid on his alleged subservience to the teachings of Friedrich Nietzsche", and on the next page, "I doubt that Delius was ever seriously touched by any philosophical influence".
Mea culpa! It's from TB's earlier book, A Mingled Chime, which I have on my shelves. I'll annotate accordingly. [TR]
I have finished my drafting, except for a short addition to the lead which I will do later. What I think we should do now is peer-review and copyedit each other's texts. Can I suggest we use this sandbox page for this purpose. There are likely to be some duplications of material around which we may have to negotiate.
Will do, but I appoint you as Editor in Chief, with plenary powers over the TR- and BB-drafted sections. [TR]
Well, up to a point; it makes sense in a collaboration for one to do the final edits, but I will value your comments on my prose, so don't hold back. Brianboulton (talk) 23:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I have opened a thread on my own talkpage for discussion of the images in the article. I have included a few of my own comments; perhaps you would add yours before we seek further advice.
There is a problem with our lead image: the link to the source seems to be broken. Unless this repairs itself, we will need another source that confirms provenance, and I can't find one on the internet. Just one more image issue for us to settle; I am seeking advice. I am also stacking up some possible replacements in the sandbox here.
Later: Jappalang has come up trumps with a lead image to replace Jelka's rather sickly painting. It's the 1907 photo of Delius which I've seen in books and online, and longed to use, but was unable to tie it down to a publication date. Jappalang has traced it original source to a German publication of 1907, so it is now OK. I have found a number of alternative images, all of which Jappalang has reviewed and approved. You can view them all, here. It is for us to decide whether to go with these images, or whether to pursue enquiries to establish the PD-US credentials of the present problematic ones. My instinct is to go with what we've got; chasing after image verification is exhausting, frustrating and usually fruitless. At any rate, let's see what the article looks like with the new images; I will post them later as a tryout. In the meantime, PR beckons... Brianboulton (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful! Blessed be the name of Jappalang! Let's abandon all our (I should say my) dodgy ones and go with Jappalang's trove. Pray hang the pictures where you find them most suitable. Phew! (I must remember to rewrite the footnote that refers to the Gauguin in the background of Jelka's soon-to-be removed portrait of FD.) Tim riley (talk) 14:37, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've loaded the revised images, and added one of Flecker for the "post-war" section. Delete it if you don't like it, but it breaks an acreage of words and is vaguely relevant. Brianboulton (talk) 17:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note. British composers between Elgar and Britten aren't really my cup of tea, though I like a few individual works by some of them. As far as Delius is concerned, I have seen A Village Romeo and Juliet twice on stage in Leeds some years ago (it was part of my Opera North subscription), but that's about it. However, I'll be happy to have a look this afternoon and see if I can spot anything that needs fixing. Best. --GuillaumeTell11:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the thanks, Tim. One other thing: I notice that the images don't have alt text. A question arose about whether this is mandatory when Gianni Schicchi was a FAC, but I see that it's there in Henry Wood. As for Lancashire, I do have connexions: I lived in Walkden when I was 3 or 4, and my sister was born in Worsley where my father worked (I particularly remember the East Lancs Road, and we lived next to a miner who always came home covered in coal-dust). My father was born in Bootle, my grandparents retired to Freshfield and my uncle once rented a house in Southport (we visited the beach at Ainsdale). And I've been to a conference in Blackpool, a wedding at St Annes and a tram trip to Fleetwood and back. I only ended up in Yorkshire because I got a job here. Best. --GuillaumeTell22:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim: could you check out the edits that User:RobertG has made to your sections of the prose? I have had to change a few he made in the lead and music section, because I don't think they were improvements. I am grateful for his efforts to help, but it would have been better had he brought his suggestions to the peer review, where they could be have been discussed first (you did not request a copyedit). Also. someone else has posted an (in my view) unwarranted clarification tag in the Leipzig and Paris section. Deal with it as you wish. Brianboulton (talk) 15:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good. I suggest we wait another 24 hours to see if anything else comes from the peer review. If it does not, and you agree, I suggest we nom it on Monday. Do you want me to do the honours or would you prefer to do it? I'm easy. Brianboulton (talk) 00:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll do it tomorrow. I feel reasonably positive about how it will go, but you never know with FAC. I will ask Jappalang to do the image review there, and I'll see if I can recruit someone to check the sources (there's only me doing FAC sources reviews at present). If you think it appropriate, by all means alert the peer reviewers; it's always good to get some early action at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 10:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have acted boldly on the basis of talkpage discussion, in removing, repositioning or rewording the recent additions made by Winstonsmith99. In the circumstances I will delay the FAC nomination for 24 hours. I am also writing politely to Mr Smith. Brianboulton (talk) 19:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alas, it's so long since I saw the show that I cannot in conscience say whether or not I think the addition justified; it would be presumptuous of me to stick my oar in. That said, I'd back your judgment on such matters against all comers. Be bloody, bold and resolute! Tim riley (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fred Delius is not really my bag but I will take a look and if appropriate make any comments that might be useful - Best, --Smerus (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think I've got through the issues you raised in this review. Happy to go through a second pass of clarifications if needed. Cheers, Fæ (talk) 22:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WikiThanks
Thank you for taking the time to do the GA review and for promptly completing it. You may find some of the other articles created as part of the editathon interesting too, see WP:GLAM/BL. Cheers Fæ (talk) 09:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have now nominated Delius at FAC. We need to watch for disruptive editing. I have asked Ruhrfisch to do a sources review, and I have notified Wehwalt who asked to be informed. You may wish to alert some of the usual suspects. I suggest that you field queries that arise from your sections and I will do so for mine. Either of us can deal with general queries. Fingers firmly crossed. Brianboulton (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(interim semi-gloat): Things have gone well, so far. I expect Tony to come back, but though he is tough he is very knowledgeable in the music field, and makes worthwhile comments. Images now seem all-OK. Sources review awaited (Ruhrfisch has been asked to do this). It may be hoping for too much to expect promotion by Sunday (last time I looked, we were still the newest FAC) but perhaps Tuesday? I am currently up to my neck in an assignment I perhaps unwisely agreed to, which has been to get Handel's Rinaldo up to featured standard in the hopes that it can be TFA on 24 February, which is the 300th anniversary of its premiere. With luck I may get it to PR this weekend, but it ought to be up at FAC by 10 February if it is to stand a chance. It's hard going; I don't know too much about Handel's early operas, though my first FA opera article was Agrippina, a couple of years ago. Brianboulton (talk) 01:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You asked about collaborating on Britten. I'd be willing to give it a go, although I am pretty busy in real life at the moment (and my current on-Wiki project involves uploading lots of images of Victorian cricketers from an old book with some pages missing I have acquired, and I was thinking of going back to Andrzej Panufnik which I left half-done some years ago with no discussion of the music to speak of). But keep asking me, because Britten fascinates me - I enjoy the cerebral aspects of music! I knew once some musicians he coached in the early 70s who were all admiration. I asked about Bax because he's the same sort of period as Delius, and it seems he was an amateur cricketer - and because I recently wrote some programme notes about his Clarinet Sonata, which I quite liked - not because I know about him. Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk16:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for pursuing this one. I don't think there could be any issue with you taking this one on considering the reasonable grace period already allowed. If you are going off-wiki for several days after making comments, it might be an idea to leave a note that we plan to extend the normal time for the comment/response process in proportion. Cheers, Fæ (talk) 23:28, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, not sure what this change was about, you might want to revert it or ask the person doing it what they are up to. Fæ (talk) 23:38, 5 February 2011 (UTC) Now reverted by a third party. Fæ (talk) 05:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Romania in the Middle Ages has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments here . If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article.
I think the article should be reassessed because of the major changes done following its peer-review. Thank you for your support. Borsoka (talk) 13:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now that the Delius FAC is winding down (9 supports, no opposes or serious issues outstanding) I am turning my main attention to Rinaldo, which I have been steadily expanding over the past week or so. As I have mentioned, I'm working against the clock in the slim hope that this can get through FAC in time to be TFA on the occasion of the opera's tercentenary, 24 February. I have just sent it to peer review, where I need some fairy rapid, but nonetheless unstinting comments; it really has to be nominated for FAC by 10 February. Amid your other activities, can you spare time for this? Brianboulton (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I missed your comments on my talk page. I note your strange sensitivities over castrati and cuts. The word "thers'" was a typo for "others". Brianboulton (talk) 16:54, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Contribution Team cordially invites you to Imperial College London
Do you know that a non-contributing editor has nominated this for peer review, "because this article is currently a GA and would be glad of other editors' comments to get this to FAC level"? See here for details. How do you feel about this? I have previously thought that the article could be upgraded, but I'd want you to be in charge. Brianboulton (talk) 13:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Is there any Wiki-etiquette on such matters, I wonder? I don't claim any more rights in the article than anyone else, but I did write most of it, with great help from several noble Wiki-colleagues. The rewrite of the lead is pretty awful, with one statement repeated, an otiose "eventually", the curious notion that Elektra had more than one UK premiere, and the ludicrous statement that Beecham was the leader rather than conductor of his orchestras. The last suggests a non-English writer, not that that is necessarily a problem but getting the English terminology right would be a start. Tim riley (talk) 14:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would not let the crass errors and solecisms stand. Nor would I contribute to the peer review as such. It will be a different story if the newcomers attempt an FAC nomination. Then, as the principal editor, it will be down to you as to whether the nom goes forward. Brianboulton (talk) 15:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is horribly rude. Recently, one of the articles that I wrote almost singlehandedly was nominated for GA completely out of the blue, without even notifying me. I did not imagine that it was really ready for GA or really was meant to go to GA. Then, of course, the nominator didn't help at all, and I had to satisfy the reviewer on a schedule that was not of my design. Tim did nearly all the work on Beecham article; anyone interested in taking it further should discuss it with him as a matter of mere courtesy. I am watchlisting the article, and I will be happy to help out with any necessary damage control. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Delius collaboration was a great success, and the participation of many helpful hands made it all the better. For the future, I'd like my next article to be a non-musical one, but I have a long-outstanding promise to work with Wehwalt on Nixon in China, so that might come first. I am considering The Pearl Fishers as my next solo opera article, and am looking at Percy Grainger as my next composer biography (if I'd thought of it sooner it could have been TFA on 20 February - 150th anniversary of his birth). Brianboulton (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I'd let you know that Rinaldo has now gone to FAC. At the moment TFA for 24 February is still open, but Rinaldo won't get there on points - a music article is scheduled for 12 February, so we have to go for a knockout. Ah, well, never despair. I dealt with your final PR points before closing the review; thanks for all you help. Brianboulton (talk) 23:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Skitch-mikado.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.
Hi Tim, as there is a request to make this image usable beyond :en, I would like to know whether there is any photographer credit for this image in the MT volume from which you scanned it. --Túrelio (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, can you help us with any more information about the London productions? I am particularly interested in more information about the 1973 production. Thanks for any assistance! -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see you already have the bones of it. A couple of crits, if they're of any help:
Michael Billington in The Guardian called the 1973 production "well played and well sung". He was enthusiastic about Sally Ann Howes as Anna, but thought Wyngarde "too fragile to be capable of inspiring unholy terror". Billington praised Moyna Cope as the head wife, phrasing "Something Wonderful" with real delicacy. He praised Roger Redfarn's production – "whipped along at a good pace and made a sumptuous eyeful out of the interpolated ballet on 'Uncle Tom's Cabin'." Ref: " 'The King and I' at the Adelphi", The Guardian, October 11, 1973, p. 14.
Robert Cushman in The Observer thought the production "scenically and economically under-nourished", Cushman liked Wyngarde's King ("a dignified clown") but thought Sally Ann Howes not formidable enough to stand up to him ("all her lines are sent straight into the auditorium while she smiles beatifically like a golden haired doll from 'The Sound of Music'. Still, she sings beautifully and the songs are the evening's real justification". Ref: "Gay times for the CIA!", The Observer, October 14, 1973, p. 36.
This is excellent information. I will copy it to the talk page and insert some info. Can you find out any more info about the varioius London productions (especially notable cast, directors/choreographers, the number of performances for each run and anything unusual about each production? I need these for the Productions section. Also information about whether each production was successful (of course, we have some of this for each production). Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From London papers, as requested:
1972 London version: originally a touring production. Started at Billingham (no, I 've never heard of it either) on June 25, followed by a 12 week tour of the provinces, taking in Leeds, Southsea, Wolverhampton, Nottingham, Hull and Manchester before the London opening in mid-October. Director, Roger Redfarn, choreographer, Sheila O'Neil. Ref: "The King and I", The Times, Jun 13, 1973, p. 13. You already have the number of London perfs. It closed on May 25, 1974. Ref: "Entertainments", The Times, May 24, 1974, p. 11
The Brynner/McKenna production reached London in June 1979, and played at the Palladium. As far as I can see, the director, choreographer and main cast were unchanged. Ref: "Listings", The Observer, June 17, 1979, p. 15. It ran there until September 27, 1980. Ref: "Classified ads", The Guardian, July 9, 1980, p. 22. Your statement that advance bookings sold out to October is borne out by the fact that the producers did not think it necessary to list the show in the The Times entertainments listings until November.
The article already has the main info on the 2000 Palladium run, I think. The production took £8million in advance ticket sales. Ref: Logan, Brian, "The King and I and me", The Guardian, May 2, 2000, p. A15. It was again directed by Christopher Renshaw, and the Kirk and Thomson designs were used. Tuptim was Aura Deva. Lady Thiang was Taewon Yi Kim again: The Observer said, "Her 'Something Wonderful' was just that." Ref: Kellaway, Kate, "Elaine's Burmese daze", The Observer, May 7, 2000, p. F11.
I can't do much with cast changes, I'm afraid. I haven't found anything of the sort in the press that is relevant to these productions.
Tim riley (talk) 10:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, I just wanted some clarification on a few things: 1) Spelling of "Rachmaninoff": Wikipedia uses this spelling, as did Rachmaninoff himself, so is the change to "Rachmaninov" a British spelling issue? I would prefer Wikipedia be consistent with itself in terms of proper name transliterations, but I understand that the style guidelines allow for variations, so I understand if this is the reason. 2) The reference I used for the information about the Jubilee Fund (short article written by Sir Henry Wood himself) specifically listed "the Gramophone Co." as the source of the donation (with a thank you from Sir Henry Wood to Vaughan Williams), so I think it would be accurate to use that name, especially since HMV is now separate from EMI. 3) I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the various wording/grammar/phrasing differences, but in one instance I do believe my change was worthwile: "Each voice part was written specifically for the voices of sixteen eminent British singers, who were chosen by Wood and Vaughan Williams. Solo lines for each vocalist intersperse passages of ensemble singing by all voices together." I find the older version's repetitive use of the word "solo[ist]" awkward; having listened to the piece many times, I believe "ensemble" is more accurate than "choir" for the style of the original arrangement; and being a music student and vocalist myself, "voice part" makes more sense than "solo part", and it accounts for the "ensemble" sections (in which there are voice parts but no solo parts) more elegantly. Although it does need a little work. Maybe: "The voice parts were written specifically for sixteen eminent British singers, who were chosen by Wood and Vaughan Williams. Solo lines for each vocalist are interspersed among passages of ensemble singing by all voices together in up to 12-part harmony."
I definitely agree with moving the info for the other pieces performed in the Jubilee concert to the references.
Hi Tim, I took the freedom to create new hooks, assuming that a reference in a paragraph generally covers the entire text before it. Hope I am not mistaken that this is how you write. I do not share Yngvadottir's concern and have indicated that at DYK, but maybe you are in a position to add the requested url. The other concerns really do belong in a Good Article Review rather than in a DYK assessment. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 21:15, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't meant as an apology. That's not to say I'm happy with what's happened.
I'm sorry that my little cleanup effort has blown up so, and has gotten editors so upset.
You got caught in the crossfire when I was defending myself from abuse. I should have been more careful to make sure that it was clear that I didn't find you at fault. --Ronz (talk) 05:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:This year of grace.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:This year of grace.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my break from music articles (which is shortly to end when I get stuck into Nixon in China), I have been working on Tom Driberg - not at all my usual stuff, but interesting nevertheless. Do you remember the old degenerate? I have just nominated the article for peer review; for reasons briefly indicated in the nom statement, I am anxious to get some heavyweight reviews in on this. No urgency, but I wonder if at some time you would cast an eye over it? I am making similar requests to Finetooth, Ruhrfisch and to some other hard-boiled reviewers known for their laser-like shrewdness and insights. Because of Driberg's controversial and indeed scandalous life, I am expecting attacks on the article, and would thus like to have identified the weaker areas well in advance. This is not a request for hasty action; the article is going nowhere for a while, but I would be pleased if, when convenient, you could look at it. Brianboulton (talk) 22:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know that I have nominated Driberg at FAC; thanks for your help in getting him there. I hope in the not too distant future that the other Tom will join him. Brianboulton (talk) 21:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, your message somehow got lost in the shuffle on my talk page. I see you're getting plenty of help on the peer review, though. I'll be away for the next 2 weeks, but wish you all the best with the article. It's looking really good! Voceditenore (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, could you take a look at the back-and-forth on the subject of Radio operas between Kleinzach and me at Talk:List_of_opera_genres. The question is: was The Red Pen specifically written for performance on the radio? If not, when/where was it premiered on stage? It would be good to have a quote from the issue(s) of The Times that you used as ref(s), or any other relevant info to which you have access, as, especially, this work appears (to me, if not to K) to possibly be the earliest known Radio opera. No hurry - I'm off to The Great Wen tomorrow (Thur), back Saturday p.m. Best. --GuillaumeTell00:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Tim riley. You have new messages at WP:MCQ. Message added 16:47, 2 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Who do you think you are to come out here and make these gratuious comments? I've been at Wikipedia for 6 years and probably longer than you. If I didn't know how to edit on Wikipedia, I would be gone a long time ago. So if it's for you to make these type of ill-conceived personal comments, I would suggest that to shut your trap because I don't want to hear about them.Farine (talk) 22:31, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After your helpful contributions at this article's recent peer review, you may like to know that it has has been nominated at FAC (a couple of places behind Sir Tom, who would I think have thrown a blue fit had he been alive to hear it). Brianboulton (talk) 16:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but my arguments are not personally with you, I am somewhat frustrated with some of the comments I have received in relation to this article.
I do not profess to "OWN" this article so I am sorry if it comes across like that. I have added all but the Filmography section of this article over the last two years, so to have it trivialized in the manner in which it has been has been quite upsetting. It's true I am not the worlds greatest speller and sometimes my grammar is a bit Luke warm (and I'm not the rogue editor by the way).
The section I have spent a lot of time on is the Ancestry section, getting little or unknown detail's about the above subject, often at some expense, just because I feel it's worth having down on some sort of record as good informative reading material. I thoroughly enjoyed the researching and wanted to share the information I found.
Ok it's not everyone's cup of tea, but it's there for those who are interested . This research has enabled me to find out about SH family links to Oliver Percy Bernard, and his involvement in WW1, both of which would have otherwise gone unnoticed.
Your comments about some of the information being "Superb" is encouraging and nice to know, however i will now sit back and disassociate myself from the article and Wikipedia and prey that someday it will make a class B or even GA standard article with the right editing.
I want to thank you for your support of Egyptian temple for FA status. I also want to thank you for FAC reviewing in general—I did it out of a sense of obligation while Egyptian temple was at FAC, and I hated it. Kudos to everybody who keeps the system working. A. Parrot (talk) 05:44, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Me too; Sir Tom in his rightful place (Nixon in China went up too). For the future: I am currently working on Percy Grainger – though not much visible yet – and I'm then going to do Kathleen Ferrier, for whom I have acquired much source material. That probably takes me to mid/late June, which may be an appropriate date for starting the Messiah project. Are you still up for this, and does that sound like a feasible timescale? I can always adjust as necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 16:39, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gentlemen, I'm much touched by this reception. I can only trust that by strict attention to duty I shall ensure a continuance of those favours which it will ever be my study to deserve. Happy to serve in the infantry on Messiah, though I'm no expert. Tim riley (talk) 22:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, I love the new article. Thank you so much!. I am so pleased that most of the research I have done has been kept and rearranged and now completely agree with a separate article for his discography section. I will still add info in the correct way as I see fit, but will not be as prolific as I have been in the past for the fear of ruining this now excellent article. I would relish the opportunity to work alongside you to make this article GA or as near too as.
The Pleasure of His Company, a 1961 film, was based on a 1958 play by Samuel A. Taylor that premiered on Broadway and was directed by and starred Cyril Ritchard, with Charlie Ruggles, who won a Tony for his supporting role. See this. I was confused by this too. I'm not convinced that there really a separate entertainment about Coward by this name.... I see an Australian source that says "Douglas Fairbanks Jnr, David Langton and Stanley Holloway in The Pleasure Of His Company" [3]. [4] says Carol Raye was also in the cast. Neither mention Coward, but they also don't mention Samuel A. Taylor. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the play in Melbourne when it played at the Comedy Theatre. The only documentation I have is the program. The Melbourne season started on the 25th April 1977. It was a comedy and nothing to do with Noel Coward. Stanley Holloway appeared in a supporting role but had many of the funniest lines. He appeared to be frail but his timing was impeccable.
The play was written by Samuel A. Taylor with Cornelia Otis Skinner. Fairbanks had appeared in the play on a number of occasions over the years and it was described in the program as his favourite role.
The following is the description of Holloway's career as it appeared in the program:
"Stanley Holloway was born in London. He first started singing as a choir boy, then graduated to solo boy and later sang solos at orchestral concerts. He was billed as "Master Stanley Holloway, The Wonderful Boy Soprano!"
In May 1919, he made his debut in London at The Winter Garden Theatre in a musical called Kissing Time and the following year at the same theatre he appeared in A Night Out. In 1921 he became one of the original members of The Co=optimists, which ran for six years. From then on he played in London for many years.
More musicals followed including Hit the Deck and a number of revues. In 1934 he was tempted into playing in pantomime for the first time, which he enjoyed, and subsequently played four more Christmas seasons. Just after the pantomime he played in all the big Variety theatres as a single act with the famous "Albert" and "Sam Small" monologues which spanned over a five year period.
A number of films followed including This Happy Breed, The Way Ahead, Champagne Charlie, The Way to the Stars, Brief Encounter. One of his major film roles was The Gravedigger to Laurence Olivier's Hamlet. Later he appeared in two famous Ealing comedies, The Lavender Hill Mob and The Titfield Thunderbolt.
In 1954 he was invited to join the Old Vic Company who were presenting A Midsummer Night's Dream at the Edinburgh Festival, with Moira Shearer playing "Titania", Robert Helpmann "Oberon" and Stanley Holloway as "Bottom". This production was done with a full ballet company and the Mendelsohn score. After its Edinburgh season the whole company were flown to the United States where they did a Coast to Coast tour. It was during its New York run at the Metropolitan Opera House that he was approached to know if he would be interested in a musical version of Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion. But it was not until December 1956 that that production burst forth as the now famous My Fair Lady and in which "Alfred P. Doolittle" sang "Get Me to the Church on Time" and "Wiv a Little Bit of Luck" for two years at the Mark Hellinger Theatre in New York, and for nearly two years at Drury Lane Theatre, London. The film of this show followed in Hollywood in 1963.
In the New Year's Honours List of 1960, he was awarded the O.B.E. by Her Majesty The Queen.
Following the success of My Fair Lady he made many trips across the Atlantic to make guest appearances on all the well known television spectacular shows with Dean Martin, Red Skelton, Danny Kaye, David Frost etc.
More recently The Shaw Festival Theatre at Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, Canada asked Stanley Holloway to play Burgess in their production of Candida. Three years later thay had built a new theatre on another site and again he was invited, this time to play William in Shaw's You Never Can Tell. This was made memorable by a Gala Performance given before Her Majesty The Queen and Prince Philip during their visit in 1973.
It turns out that there is an article on French Wikipedia on this composer (rather than the similarly-named one whom you correctly removed). I've added it now. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Beechamstoriescover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles05:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit early, but maybe we should agree a general strategy for approaching this expansion. What parts of the article would you like to work on? I am easy about this, but once I know what I'm going to do, I can begin to collect source materials. I'm bogged down with Grainger at the moment, but will perhaps have something reviewable in about a week. Then I want to do Kathleen Ferrier; I need to do a "nice" person, after my recent preoccupations with Delius (syphilis), Tom Driberg (sexual predator) Nixon (all-round bad egg) and Grainger (flagellant racist with syphilitic father). Of course I'll probably find that Kathleen was a crack cocaine addict who practised baby-farming. We shall see. Anyway, hopefully Messiah can begin in earnest by mid-June. Let me know if you see any problems with that timescale. Brianboulton (talk) 10:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen pp. 16-17 of today's Guardian review section? An article by Harry Christophers on tonight's "Supersize" Messiah at the RFH. Come to think of it, you're probably there in the audience, right now. But the article is worth hanging on to (performance history and all that). Brianboulton (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the new and questionable material here. I made this change, but I think it still may be talking about the same thing twice (the Ledlanet Nights). If I understand correctly, that should not be mentioned under the opera section. Please consider modifying - If there is still dubious material there, let me know how you want to deal with it. The contributor may be John Calder. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, thanks for your great feedback on The Red Badge of Courage FAC. Your comments and suggestions were spot on, and I appreciate your insight. In addition, thanks for the offer to access British archives -- that could definitely come in handy with future endeavors! Take care, María(habla conmigo) 00:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked over the JSTOR and press articles; there's some pretty good stuff there, for which many thanks. You can view the full list of assembled sources here; it looks impressive. I hope to be at work on this next wek, when Grainger is safely in peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 12:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Among the stuff you sent was a Sunday Times review by Humphrey Burton, dated 24.4.88, of Leonard's Ferrier biography. Burton's piece contains a passage I'd like to quote. Do you have a page number for the review? As there is no online link, FAC reviewers will require a page reference. Brianboulton (talk) 10:05, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
At last I have sent Percy to peer review, though I'm still tweaking and polishing. It really does need someone uninvolved to look it over, as I have been pretty well the only active editor in the month since I began working on it. I'd be very obliged if you could comment – don't forget to listen to the sound file, and to the couple of soundlinks in the External links section (Percy's rapid-fire performance of "Country Gardens" is a particular delight). I'll be happy to return the review favour whenever necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 18:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Aaargh ;-) That one was off my radar completely, Brian. Just nipped 'round and had a look...brilliant! What a pity he never wrote an opera. I'd love to have him the Opera portal. I was going to suggest it to Portal:Australian music, until I saw the contents, which are just a tad... er... one-sided. Anyhow, I added it to the list of FAs over at WikiProject Composers and the Delius one too. They seem to be a little dozy over there these days. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I was not actually fishing for compliments re Percy; I was teasing Tim for not mentioning PG in his impressive expansion of the Nellie article (there is no real reason why he should, of course, but they did meet and even worked together briefly). I'm not really surprised that the Australian music portal has little on Grainger, since he hardly lived there and wrote very little characteristically Australian music. Grainger doesn't neatly fit into portals, being more or less unclassifiable. Brianboulton (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Glass of white wine anyone? A plate of macaroni and a rusk? Either Grainger's dad built something for Melba or Melba's dad built something for the Graingers, but I can't now remember which. Tim riley (talk) 20:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And after that Portal:Dictator kitsch. At the OP we thought this might be suitable for Kim Jong-Il's Sea of Blood, Hitler's paintings, Saddam Hussein's romantic novels, Mussolini's poems and Colonel Gaddafi's short stories (they used to be best sellers in Egypt, apparently). Voceditenore (talk) 21:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I now extremely little about this publication, so I can't answer your question on the talk page, but your work and research with the article has been impressive! Cheers, Eisfbnoretalk17:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Edward Elgar (1857–1934) was an English composer. Among his best-known compositions are orchestral works such as the Enigma Variations, the Pomp and Circumstance Marches, concertos for violin and cello, and two symphonies. He also composed choral works, including The Dream of Gerontius, chamber music and songs. He was appointed Master of the King's Musick in 1924. Although his works are regarded as quintessentially English, most of his musical influences were not from England but from continental Europe. A self-taught Catholic composer from a poor background, he nevertheless married the daughter of a senior British army officer. He struggled to achieve success until his forties, when his Enigma Variations proved immediately popular. His following work, The Dream of Gerontius (1900) remains a core repertory work in Britain and elsewhere. One of the first composers to take the gramophone seriously, he conducted a series of recordings of his works between 1914 and 1925. Elgar's music came, in his later years, to be seen as appealing chiefly to British audiences. More recently, some of his works have been taken up again internationally, but the music remains more played in Britain than elsewhere. (more...)
Hi John! I noticed you mentioning that a message from you got deleted from Ssilvers' user page. That's because it was posted on his main user page, rather than his user talk / discussion page. Usually messages on user talk pages won't get immediately deleted, but it's considered rude to post on their main user page. If it was just an accident, then sorry for dragging it out; I just noticed that you had posted on a few people's main user pages recently. Cheers--ragesoss (talk) 20:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Dear Ragesoss, Thanks for pointing out the problem, which was caused by my clicking on my intended addressees name then not recognising that I had reached a USER rather than USER TALK page, especially since the User pages in question, looked very like User Talk pages. However, my apologies to Tim riley and Ssilvers for my error and of course, NO rudeness intended since in each case I have been massively grateful for their help. John Thaxter (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tim. Congrats on the article. Question: one of the main sources is Moore's 1984 book. But, the references say Moore (1986). Kenatipospeak!18:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking - I will be glad to look at the PR, but it will likely take me a few days (we are even more backlogged than usual at peer review). Ruhrfisch><>°°15:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also thanks from me, Tim. I've had a quick look (and ended up adding succession boxes to the Robertson and Edwards articles and trying to square the box dates with the articles). Anyway, I'll devote some time to the article this evening. As ever, links to other articles don't always provide satisfactory results. Best. --GuillaumeTell18:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have opened a workpage, here, for noting down useful sources etc. Please fel free to add anything that looks useful. Do you have the JSTORs as listed? Brianboulton (talk) 18:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tim
It was good to meet you yesterday. I've tidied up my Andrew Forrester page -- if you get a chance and could look at it to make sure I haven't done anything awful, that would be incredibly kind.
In the meantime, I've made a page for a stage designer I admire, Tobias Hoheisel. I think it's OK, but for some reason his last name in the heading has a lower-case 'h', and I can't work out how to fix it.
Sorry to be a bore, but you kindly offered to help. (An offer you may live to regret!)
Best, Judith
Victorianistjaf (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for joining and contributing the British Library editathon, you definitely earned this barnstar!
Further teamwork on the articles created and any issues will be running at WP:GLAM/BL (so keep it on your watchlist) there are some photos from the event at Commons:Category:Editathon,_British_Library and your comments are welcome at feedback. Future events are listed at the UK Chapter wiki at wmuk:Events so you may want to keep the link in your bookmarks to see if there is anything else coming up you might enjoy. Perhaps you would like to come along to one of our regional social wiki-meets where keen Wikipedians debate all things wiki-related? We are growing the GLAM network which helps e-volunteers of all types engage with their most loved cultural institutions and you can always drop me a note or email if you would like to know more about how you could help with our work. Cheers Fæ (talk) 23:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I'm here, thanks for your help so far! Will address point shortly! Really appreciate your minor corrections BTW. ♦ Dr. Blofeld14:46, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thankyou sir!! I was impressed by your review and the fact that you addressed them! If you want to collaborate in the future over anything let me know!♦ Dr. Blofeld20:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim - is there some good reason why the title of the Shore article has "(singer)" after his name? There is no other Andrew Shore anywhere in Wikipedia (see here), but perhaps you have another Andrew Shore up your sleeve? If not, I'm rather inclined to move the article to Andrew Shore. Incidentally, if the real Andrew Shore eventually has to be disambiguated, the usual thing is to add "(baritone)" or "(bass-baritone)" rather than just "(singer)". Best. --GuillaumeTell17:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do your multifarious sources have any information on Phyllis Spurr, the pianist who accompanied Kathleen Ferrier at many of her recitals and recordings in the late 1940s and early 1950s? Unlike Gerald Moore, Phyllis seemingly shunned publicity; I can't find any references to her on the internet apart from her appearances in lists of performers. Nor can I find that she ever worked with anyone else but Ferrier; after the latter's death, Spurr seems to disappear completely from the concert and recording scene. If any of your watchers have any useful information, perhaps they would note it on my talkpage. If enough can be gleaned I will do a short article. Brianboulton (talk) 22:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked out the Spurr material you unearthed. Probably not enough info for more than a brief stub, but I'll consider it. Thanks for your help. Brianboulton (talk) 18:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for participating in the English and Drama Editathon at the British Library on June 4. I hope you enjoyed the day and got something useful out of it.
If you are interested in working on Wikipedia, you might want to consider joining one of the WikiProjects. These are places where team work between editors interested in a particular topic can be coordinated. Some suggestions for WikiProjects that may be of interest to you as a participant in the event on Saturday include Literature, Poetry or Science Fiction. A full list of literature and language related WikiProjects can be found here, and a list of all WikiProjects is here. The WikiProjects often have things that need doing, and if you need help you can often ask in their talk page.
But there are other places you can get involved. If you are interested on working on images, such as improving image descriptions, categorisation or uploading new media, consider getting involved in Wikimedia Commons. Wikisource also needs people willing to help make available original source material, and Wikiquote is trying to compile a directory of quotes which you may be able to contribute to.
If you want to continue some of the work we got started on Saturday, here are a few potential things to help with:
Following on from work on Ella D'Arcy on Saturday, work has started to make all of The Yellow Book available on Wikisource. If you go to the page on Wikisource and pick a volume then click on 'scan index' you can start helping to proofread pages from the journal - simply click on the page you want to work on, and go through to check that the text on the left reflects the text on the right. If you need any help with getting started, please ask User:Tom Morris.
If you created any new articles at the event, you might want to submit them to Did you know?.
If you are able to translate into other languages, why not pick one of the articles we worked on, translate it and post it on another language version of Wikipedia: there are now versions in hundreds of languages. On Wikimedia Commons, it is also possible to provide multilingual descriptions of images and categories: this enables editors on the other language versions to better find images and media files they can use in their project.
If you need images from the British Library to illustrate articles, please add them to the image requests page. If you would like a British LIbrary curator to help collaborate on an article, please add it to the collaborations page.
I have sent Ferrier to PR. It has been a surprisingly difficult article to write; I'd be grateful for any comments or suggestions for improvement. By the way, which is you in that photograph further up your talkpage? Brianboulton (talk) 18:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Look for the smug old fart in a bow tie centre stage. Shall devote tomorrow to the Ferrier PR, though have been peeping during work-in-progress and know how good it is. Tim riley (talk) 18:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well smug old fart or not, my wife thinks you're a bit of a dish (reminiscent of a slightly younger Colin Davis). Looking forward to your Ferrier comments; by the way, I've not been able to find a source which confirms the "terrier" pronunciation so I've left this alone. Brianboulton (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Handel in Dublin. Hugo Cole, Irish Arts Review (1984-1987), Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer, 1984), pp. 28-30 (JSTOR)
Handel's Performances of 'Messiah': The Evidence of the Conducting Score. Donald Burrows, Music & Letters, Vol. 56, No. 3/4 (Jul. - Oct., 1975), pp. 319-334 (JSTOR)
Messiah: Editions and Performances. Charles Mackerras and Basil Lam, The Musical Times, Vol. 107, No. 1486 (Dec., 1966), pp. 1056-1057 (JSTOR)
Mr. Charles Jennens: The Compiler of Handel's 'Messiah'. The Musical Times and Singing Class Circular, Vol. 43, No. 717 (Nov. 1, 1902), pp. 726-727 (JSTOR)
Where the 'Messiah' Was First Performed. The Musical Times, Vol. 44, No. 730 (Dec. 1, 1903), pp. 798-799 (JSTOR)
Which Messiah? Nicholas McGegan. The Musical Times, Vol. 133, No. 1797 (Nov., 1992), pp. 577-579 (JSTOR)
Plus the other references mentioned here, where I have been absent-mindedly assembling a draft section on post-Handel performance practice, and one on recordings. Tim riley (talk) 21:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...and a couple more problems to turn the air blue: Ref 53 JSTOR link ain't working. Ref 62: I think you need to attribute your quote from "The Harmonicon" in the text (and say what it is - magazine, broadsheet or whatever), otherwise the reader will have no idea where it's coming from. I'll format the ref when you've done this. I must say I'm impressed with the scope and depth of your research; makes mine seem rather limited. Brianboulton (talk) 22:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The first was my fault - a stray comma in the url. There was another broken link to the Handel.org site, which I've had to redirect to the site's front page, alas. Something has gone wrong with our refs 14 (no publication title shows) and 28 - unexpected screamer. But we progress! Tim riley (talk) 14:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
14 and 28 were my blunders, put right now. While I'm waiting for some more sources to help me with the music section (old Percy Young c. 1951 is surprisingly good, btw), I shall mainly be working in a sandbox on the subarticle list of movements (and attending to some reviewing duties and getting Ferrier ready for FAC if I can find the time). Thanks for the list of editions - looks like another subarticle in the making but we can decide later on that. Brianboulton (talk) 15:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While working on the subarticle I have investigated the wikisource link in the "Texts and structure" section of the existing article. This is an Alladdin's cave of soundfiles, and includes the entire text. With this resource we don't need a subarticle for the list of movements. But I am not sure that wikisource pages can be linked within an article in this way; I have always thought of them as external links. I am seeking advice from the ever-wise and all-knowing Ruhrfisch on this point, and also on the copyright status of the soundfiles. In the meantime I will suspend work on the subarticle. In any event I have a number of commitments this weekend which will affect the amount of work I can do on the article. Look out on my talkpage (or his) for Ruhrfisch's reply. Brianboulton (talk) 15:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note. I've just been catching up on email and WP watchlist stuff after a trip to Sussex for (ahem!) Meistersinger. I realised as we passed the turn for Folkington that I'd forgotten my camera and would be unable to take a picture of ED's grave - aargh! I'll see if a friend of mine who lives in Lewes can do the necessary. Anyway, I'm busy tomorrow, but promise to have a look at all those articles over the weekend. I'm rather a slow worker myself, but I do admire your industry! Best. --GuillaumeTell21:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I'd re-read the article now that the PR has closed before getting on to Corri and co. A few minor things:
Vic-Wells: "lighter works by Balfe, Donizetti, Offenbach and Johann Strauss". Any idea what the Donizetti operas were? If just things like The Elixir of Love, OK, but Lucia, for example, is far from light.
It was The Daughter of the Regiment, which will pass as light, I think.
Touring: I don't think you say when ENO stopped doing UK tours. I saw performances by them in Nottingham in 1981 (i.e. after ENON got going).
Good point. It was 1983. I've added a line on this.
Repertoire: "the Czech repertoire had been well represented, and a representative range of French and Russian operas has been presented" - "represented" and "representative and "presented" are uncomfortably close to each other (I hear the Pirate King singing the rhyming cod-recitative "For some ridiculous reason ..." in my mind's ear).
Decidedly! I've redrawn.
Commissions and premieres: something wrong with "and Stephen Oliver, 1991)".
Many thanks Tim. I have also touched upon Leslie Henson and Billy Bennett. Could you check these to see if what I have done is ok. All the best Cassianto (talk) 16:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim Yes I would certainly be interested in helping out on the Billy Bennett article. I have heard of most music hall performers and find the subject fascinating. I created the Mark Sheridan article a few months back and do what I can on it with the research I have done. Who was your ancestor? Cassianto (talk) 22:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wehwalt found a cartoon on page 387 of this source, that satirizes Patience. The Patience article, however, is pretty full of images, so I don't think we need this until, perhaps, we expand Patience and have more room for images. There are also a couple of other images there satirizing Pinafore, but they may require too much setup. Do you think the image quality is crisp enough to use, or should we forget about this as being "interesting, but not necessary"? -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What I like about this image (which, by the bye, I can easily clean up) is that it uses Patience to satirise local notables, and the cartoonist has felt confident in assuming that his audience would immediately get the allusion. In short, it illustrates the extent to which G&S had become common currency. Well worth salting away, I think, for use when we expand the article. Tim riley (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. If you can think of any other G&S articles where this image (or the Pinafore ones) ought to be added sooner, then please do go ahead with the cleanup and uploading when you can. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On 25 June 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jenny Lind tour of America, 1850–52, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that 4,476 tickets were auctioned for the first concert by the "Swedish Nightingale", soprano Jenny Lind(pictured) in her 1850–52 tour of the United States? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
Great article! But America, to my understanding, means more than the United States, I wonder if that might be reflected in the title but don't know how? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:23, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! It was very nearly all-US, but there was a detour to Cuba and another to Canada. "The West Indies and North America" is a bit of a mouthful, perhaps, and I thought just "America" would cover the two extraterritorial excursions without making too much of the point. Tim riley (talk) 18:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of mentioning that in my younger days, while ushering ticket-holders to their seats for the morning concerts in the Freemasons' Hall, Edinburgh, I inadvertently directed Bernard Levin to the right seat in the wrong row (or the wrong seat in the right row, I forget which). He wasn't at all amused when the real ticket-holder turned up, and I had to grovel to both of them. You can also console yourself with the thought that your prose is better than mine. --GuillaumeTell15:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I should have added my congrats, too - excellent stuff. Changing the subject very slightly, I've just been looking at Carl Rosa Opera and there seems to be a discrepancy between that article and English National Opera. The ENO article says that CRO was wound up in 1958, whereas the CRO article says 1960. Harold Rosenthal in the Grove Opera article on CRO says that at the end of 1958 Sadler's Wells "took over same of the company's personnel and the short-lived "Touring Opera 1958" was formed. The 1960 CRO season at the Prince's Theatre was promoted by the Carl Rosa Trust but, as both Rosenthal and the CRO article say, "the company's existence came to an end with the performance of Don Giovanni on 17 September 1960. A bit of adjustment in the ENO article seems called for, perhaps? Also, the CRO article says that "the general director, manager and musical director" of SW resigned in '58. The musical director was Gibson, but did "Tucker [and] his deputy Stephen Arlen" have the titles "general director" and "manager"? Rosenthal says that Arlen was appointed general manager of SWO in 1951, and then administrative director ... in 1966 he was appointed managing director (wonder what the differences were, if any?). Sorry if all this is a bit nit-picky. (On the other hand, if you wish to arrange pistols at dawn with Ssilvers, I could volunteer to be the umpire.) Best. --GuillaumeTell10:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your congrats are most gratefully received. I shall check out the Carl Rosa/Sadler's Wells points you make above (which are decidedly to the point - thank you!). If memory serves, I perpetrated most of the Carl Rosa Company article as well as of the ENO one, but in any case I am pretty confident that my Wikipedia guardian angel (a.k.a. Ssilvers) does not keep loaded firearms in the house. Tim riley (talk) 19:55, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right. It's not the ball I mind; it's the bang! And with swords, it's not the blade I mind, it's the blood.... -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tim
Thanks for your message. Yes, just crazy busy, trying to finish a draft of a new book before I start teaching a summer course. So no time for anything else.
Will be back soon, I hope!
Thanks for checking in: much appreciated!
JudithVictorianistjaf (talk) 20:58, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The delegate says a spotcheck for compliance with WP:V and close paraphrasing is needed for all nominators. Would appreciate it if you could take a look. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim. Thank you for taking on the peer review. I was taken by surprise because I fully expected it to slumber in the list of requests for several weeks before anyone picked it up. I've addressed the points you made so far. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you once again for all your hard work on this Tim. It will take me a day or two to address all these points, and I hope that the editors who made the additions will also chime in. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:23, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Peer review/Malvern, Worcestershire/archive1. I noticed you comments regarding the references in the Research and development section. My original section was much shorter. I feel that too much detail has been added; making it a potted history of the facility. Given that TRE/RRE have their own articles, also well enhanced by the same contributor, perhaps it would be an idea to shorten this again. Thoughts? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest issue I've spotted is your sources, you've relied largely on sources by Levin himself. i feel you need to introduce far more third-party sources from a wider range of authors for it to truly be satisfactory,. You might try searching in google books to achieve this and perhaps replacing some of Levin's sources with those of third party authors if possible. Good job though!♦ Dr. Blofeld10:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I looked in google books, strange for such a famous journalist to have poor coverage about him. There is some coverage in source like this but its difficult to find anything solid. ♦ Dr. Blofeld12:02, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I see you acknowledged this sourcing issue in the peer review and I fully agree, its probably what would stop it reaching FA. eventually which is a pity, but its certainly GA worthy.♦ Dr. Blofeld12:07, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You might consider using cite web/cite book parameters on future articles or double/multiple image selections like in one of my articles Sisimiut for example. You are welcome to review Lake Burton, Antarctica which has been awaiting a review for a long time now.. Shortish but pretty comprehensive.♦ Dr. Blofeld14:15, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mm I've listed it under Media and journalism but he also qualifies for the writers category. Perhaps he should be removed from the writers listing and just listed under media and journalism in the list of good articles, any thoughts? The thing is he was very much a critic and writer so should be listed under both if this is permitted. I'll ask Malleus, see what he thinks.♦ Dr. Blofeld14:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on all your excellent work on the Levin article. I agree with Dr. Blofeld about the sourcing - it seems that GA is the right place for this article for now. I, of course, disagree strongly with the use of cite web and similar templates that make editing so much more difficult for non-techies (although I think cite book works well in the books list). All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is nearing a state when it could go for peer review. Here are a few areas that I'd value your comments on:-
Do the Synopsis and Libretto sections need strengthening? Reading through just now, they seemed a little superficial.
Both are fine, I think. We need to have a party line on "his/His" for the Good Lord's personal pronoun. I wonder if the very telling point Gerda makes about the scarcity of mentions of "Jesus", "Christ" and "Messiah" might with advantage be added here.
Performance history, all told, accounts for over 3,000 words. This seems a rather high proportion of the article. I wonder if we can work to reduce/summarise this information in a way that does not detract from the article as a whole? It's all good stuff, but maybe too predominant?
I've pruned, but if you can see any more that we could lose without detracting from the narrative, please do.
Likewise, I think 800 words on recordings is maybe a little overlong.
Trickier, I think: the recording section accurately reflects the perf hist of the 20th c. and I can't see any section that could be blitzed without losing the thread. Perhaps the penultimate para (and even the last one) could go - what think you?
I've done a ce job on the section & reduced it by 100 words. Don't think I've left out anything important; if I have, by all means put it back. Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like a view on the Music section and whether further work is needed here.
The music section is impressive, but as I said on the work page, I think we'll get flak for assuming too much technical knowledge in casual visitors; I think we should tough that out if we can.
I'm back from a 48-hour break. To me, Messiah looks ready for assessment by other eyes, so if it's OK with you I'll put it up for peer review tomorrow (Tuesday). I will ask Jappalang to look at all the images and soundfiles, and I'll also ask Ruhrfisch for a review since it was his suggestion that led me to start work on the article in the first place. When it's up, perhaps you would alert some of the gang who like your articles, so as to get the widest range of comments that we can. Brianboulton (talk) 22:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hope the break was pleasing; welcome back to the workhouse – bowl of gruel, anyone? Yes, by all means put Messiah up for PR. I shall spread the word. Tim riley (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I added this about the premiere myself so I must have got it from somewhere. I can't for the life of me remember where. It wasn't online so it may have been in one of the books in the bibliogrpahy. I should have noted it at the time. I will be going to the UK to Malvern next week. I'll try to sort it out. Perhaps it's in the church archives. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:09, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's this but it's certainly not where I got it from. In fact it looks very much as if the web site has taken a lot of its content from our Wikipedia article and paraphrased it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:24, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That'll do me. I shall, however, forbear to carry the statement across to the Elgar article until I find a second source corroborating it. O me of little faith! Tim riley (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim. Unfortunately, I believe that Britten photograph is still pretty much copyrighted in the UK. I have detailed my thoughts in the speedy deletion request on the photograph, but in short, Boosey & Hawkes is a UK company and that photograph would have been very much first published in the UK, where copyright law gives 70 years of protection since publication (thus copyrighted till start of 2016). We have not even considered the US side for this photograph as well. Jappalang (talk) 01:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As we have lost the soundfile from Part III (see PR), and as it seems possible that there are no PD soundfiles for this Part, I have restored your "Worthy is the Lamb" manuscript illustration. Can you check out the source information on the image file? If this is incorrect, can you include full publication details of the source you scanned it from? Brianboulton (talk) 12:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Edison sound files are Public Domain and can be used. The person objecting to them has drawn an erroneous conclusion about the copyright without actually looking into it. See the PR page. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I am hoping to get it main page for his 100th and your er, perhaps better not to go there in a couple of years.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest *not* splitting the Offenbach "works" article. One article should contain all his works, operettas first, perhaps. I don't see any advantage in making the reader look in two places to see Offenbach's list of works. Just my 2cents. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, sorry for the late reply. As I read it, it seems Sondheim is still alive and is not a fanatical recluse or such. It would be perfectly reasonable that one can take a photograph of him and upload it "free" to Wikipedia. As such, NFCC #1 would be violated if a copyrighted image is attempted for "fair use". Jappalang (talk) 01:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the peer review has probably run its course. I don't think there are any significant issues that still require our attention and I am generally happy with the article. In the past few days I have done some tweaking (as has Gerda); I have asked Jappalang for comments on the two image files added since his PR sweep; I have added a couple of nuggets from the two NYT articles which Ruhrfisch emailed me. Over the next day or so I'll give the article a final runover - I suggest you do, too. If all looks well, we could consider a FAC nom on, say, Tuesday? Brianboulton (talk) 13:10, 24 July 2011 (UTC)i[reply]
If it's OK with you, I'll nominate on Wednesday. There probably won't be many comments to field before your return on Thursday> I'll ask Gerda if she wants to be a conom. Brianboulton (talk) 10:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've reread the article, and spell-checked it. All fine me judice (except for a "greviously", in a quote, which still troubles me. Very happy to join Gerda as co-nominator, but we sail under the flag of Captain Boulton. Tim riley (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still don't know what that means. I didn't do much more than getting Bach out of the game, even if reliable sources saw him in. For the extra articles I got DYK credit, 3 of 4 so far, I'm quite happy as is, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, you are part of the team and that is that. I have just made the nomination; I am off-wiki until late on Thursday (in London erecting a bed for my daughter, believe it or not) so I won't be able to field the early comments, but I don't expect there'll be many. I am letting the main peer-reviewers know about the nomination, but feel free to spread the word; an active nom is always a good thing. Brianboulton (talk) 22:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the event, "I don't expect there'll be many" was a bit off the mark, and a highly active first 24 hours has brought us six supports, some useful comments, and some minor disagreement. So all looks healthy thus far. Tim, will you be fielding Nikki's remaining source queries? We don't want to duplicate our efforts. Brianboulton (talk) 08:55, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've just glanced through Offenbach (have you heard the one about the two musical dogs and the musical cat?) and noticed that musette leads to a dab page, none of whose definitions seem to fit a work for cello and piano (?or cello and orchestra? Or both?) unless it's the bal-musette, which it probably isn't. Will have a longer look tomorrow with a view to contributing to the PR. Best. --GuillaumeTell21:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wondering if you missed my short list of fairly well-known numbers which I interposed after Ssilvers had asked about adding some somewhere? Should I perhaps give this more prominence by moving it to the end and giving it a header? Then others who may have missed it might comment? --GuillaumeTell09:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had indeed missed it - very remiss of me. Yes, I'm sure giving it a new slot in the latest section would be a good idea. We might be able to assemble a very useful section for the "Works" part of the article. Rigorous forensic examination of my contributions would probably reveal my bias in favour of up-tempo numbers, and it will be no bad thing to have some slower numbers given a bit of spotlight. Tim riley (talk) 10:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I came upon Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Country_of_birth.2C_for_historic_bios (worth a quick skim-through) and inserted a link to the Great Prussia Controversy to see if anyone had anything to say. Not a matter of great moment, but you might reflect on Johnbod's comment below my contribution. Oh, and thanks for the Ruddigore quote - I don't know the work all that well and certainly didn't recall thimble-riggers. I'll be seeing Opera North's production again soon in Leeds - you might be interested in seeing the production when it visits the Barbican if you haven't already booked. --GuillaumeTell17:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re List of compositions by Jacques Offenbach, the intro now states "Offenbach is principally known for his operettas, of which he composed 98 between 1847 and 1880. He also wrote two opéras, Die Rheinnixen and his unfinished Les contes d'Hoffmann." whereas he is actually known for the operettas and Hoffmann. (Hoffmann is probably his best known and most performed work.) I used the word 'masterpiece' to try to redress the balance. The usage is unoriginal, see here, but perhaps you'd like to have a go at rewording it? --Kleinzach01:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
File source problem with File:Hugh_walpole_1909.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Hugh_walpole_1909.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Hi Tim. Two refs now for Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1 first performed at the Wyche School, Malvern:
<ref name=ElgarWyche1>{{cite book
|last=Garrard
|first=Rose
|title=A Malvern Treasury
|year=2010
|publisher=Garrard Art Publications
|isbn=9781905795567
|page=150}}
</ref>
<ref name="ElgarWyche2">{{cite web
|url=http://www.achurchnearyou.com/parish/420043/
|title=Malvern Wells and Wyche
|year=2010
|publisher=The Church of England, Archbishops' Council
|accessdate=1 August 2011}}
</ref>
There may also be other mentions. I'll know when I go through all the books on Elgar in the reference section of Malvern library this week. Regards, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Haha nonsense, there is nothing to apologize about. I'm sure you are very busy and PR is a voluntary thing, so I can't thank you enough for putting in the time. About the picture, is there a way to upload a photo of him from when he was in his 20s? He is 80+, it seems strange that wiki cant have a photo for recognitions sake. I opened a new PR Wikipedia:Peer review/Stephen Sondheim/archive2 Many thanks, Phaeton23 (talk) 17:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The other from the team (and thanks for well worded one), I came to thank you for the great experience! I still feel I took more out of the article than put in, thanks for including me. When I wrote despised and rejected I thought not only of the Messiah but also some editors who left WP. I will sing Messiah in choir (alto) - first time - on September 18. Thanks for an excellent preparation! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:23, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Let me add my congratulations and thanks here as well. I was busy and only left one note (on Brian's page) but I do appreciate the group effort. Ruhrfisch><>°°16:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, you may be interested in a mass upload at Commons:Category:Sheet Music Lithograph Covers at Boston Public Library. These all date from the 1840s to 1870s and feature some interesting popular images of composers and performers. I have around half uploaded at the moment and there should end up being around 150 in total. These would seem perfect for illustrating a few otherwise sparse articles. Cheers Fæ (talk) 22:16, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The upload completed with 182 images. If you have not tried it before, I recommend switching on cat-a-lot in Commons Preferences / Tools for categories. It is very handy for adding extra categories. Cheers Fæ (talk) 04:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tim. I've just tweaked a few links etc, nothing substantial. Well done on your fine work. It's a pleasure to read. When is your knighthood being announced? :) -- Jack of Oz[your turn]05:42, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a glance at the article, which looks good, but all I know about the Queen's Hall (sometimes known as the Old Queen's Hall) is that it's where the Proms started and that it was bombed to smithereens. In fact, I didn't even know exactly where it was. I'll have a more thorough look, but probably won't be able to do much more than suggest changes to wording and similar (if that). The Royal Opera is (potentially) a different kettle of fish, but we'll see. --GuillaumeTell21:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I'm a little late to the party, but... Thanks for all the work you did in making Messiah (Handel) a Featured Article! Your work is much appreciated.
In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to comment on another Featured article candidate... or perhaps review one of the Good Article nominees, as there is currently a backlog. Any help is appreciated! All the best, – Quadell(talk)
I do not recall specific examples of h and k swaps, but it seems possible to me. I know the cities of Kassel and Karlsruhe were often spelled Cassel and Carlsruhe in German in the 19th century (and Koeln was Coeln (Cologne)). There is also the whole issue of writing and being able to read it - Fraktur and Sütterlin are always tricky and h and k may look similar in them. Ruhrfisch><>°°03:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Having had my recent fill of high culture, I've reverted to type and have spent the last few weeks grubbing around in Philip Larkin's youthful smutty stories (nasty man, nasty nature, great poet). The result is Brunette Coleman, which I have just sent to peer review. So, if you want to get down and dirty...I'd be very pleased for any comments. Brianboulton (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Heads-up, I passed on a link to your talk page here and suggested to the NY magazine that if the want to ask you about your involvement at the BL editathon that they could email you via the system here - keep an eye open for email. --Fæ (talk) 18:44, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thomas Beecham (1879–1961) was an English conductor and impresario best known for his association with the London Philharmonic and the Royal Philharmonic orchestras. From the early 20th century until his death, Beecham was a major influence on the musical life of Britain and, according to the BBC, was Britain's first international conductor. Born to a rich industrial family, Beecham began his career as a conductor in 1899. He used his access to the family fortune to finance opera from the 1910s until the start of the Second World War, staging seasons at Covent Garden, Drury Lane and His Majesty's Theatre with international stars, his own orchestra and a wide repertoire. Among the works he introduced to England during his career were Richard Strauss's Elektra, Salome and Der Rosenkavalier and three operas by Frederick Delius. Together with his younger colleague Malcolm Sargent, Beecham founded the London Philharmonic, and he conducted its first performance at the Queen's Hall in 1932. In the 1940s, he worked for three years in the United States, where he was music director of the Seattle Symphony and conducted at the Metropolitan Opera. After his return to Britain, he founded the Royal Philharmonic in 1946 and conducted it until his death in 1961. (more...)
With great pleasure I see Beecham on the Main page, setting the stage for Michael Herrmann (DYK, my new record: not much more than a day from taking picture to appearing, he can sing and probably dance), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
SSilvers recommended I introduce myself to you... I had hoped to get the chance to say hello to you at the WikiMedia meet-up in London last weekend (an event I'd found out about from your user page — thank you). Unfortunately, that didn't happen. So I'll just say that recently I've been doing a little work on the Benjamin Dale article. My contributions have slowed down a bit with the onset of WWI. But I hope to get over this hiatus in the coming days. Maybe I'll get the chance to meet you in London another time. Best regards. --MistyMorn (talk) 14:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First, I'm glad to see that TB will be TFA on 25 August - a day after one of my early FAs, Farthest South, has a similar honour. I'd more or less forgotten that article, written at the zenith of my ice fixation in 2008, when we were mere boys. Secondly, I am starting work on Georges Bizet, with a wiew maybe of tackling Les pecheurs de perles in the autumn. I just thought I'd check that you are not planning to work in the same area. If you're not, is there any chance of getting [this JSTOR article to me? I'd be most obliged. Brianboulton (talk) 19:15, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you may like to know that I've nominated Brunette Coleman at FAC, now that things are finally moving there. I had intended to leave it until September, but a delay with my Amundsen project has provided a window. Brianboulton (talk) 14:21, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I didn't do much. Unfortunately, he'd retired before my "Who's Who in British Opera" was published in 1993. On the other hand, I have a fairly complete set of "Opera" magazines and indexes since 1973, but on the third hand, they're scattered randomly in a collection of cardboard boxes all over the place (I've been meaning to have them bound for ages). I'll do some rooting around this evening - I'm fairly sure that there must have been an article there around the time of his retirement. I've heard him once or twice on the radio: the one I remember was when he'd asked Margaret Price to choose an opera that would celebrate her x years since her debut at the ROH. She chose Norma, which turned out not to be a great success.
Changing the subject, did you do anything about that Sacheverell Sitwell Offenbach article? And changing it again, it may be that Queen Victoria actually knew what a grand opera was (I bet she'd seen a few by Meyerbeer). Tom Sutcliffe definitely knew - he was talking about works like Don Carlos. Jenkins and Hoggart are just journalists. But I'm not going to pursue it. --GuillaumeTell16:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tim
I tarted up Bryan Robertson's page, which had no references. I added two (his obits) plus more info, but I've clearly forgotten how to add the footnotes properly: can you advise?
Sorry to be a nuisance!
Hope you're thriving. Best Judith Victorianistjaf (talk) 15:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Tim. I fear I get worse at this, not better. Yes, Bryan R was a fascinating man, and a genius of a curator. I was reminded because there's a Rothko show at the Whitechapel opening next week, which is based on his 1961 show, the first time Rothko had been shown here. Best Judith Victorianistjaf (talk) 08:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand you too have nominated SH for potential GA status. I have heard from Ssilvers and he felt the need to ask if I minded you and him also nominating. I do not mind at all. You guys deserve virtually all the credit as without you the article would have remained a stub for all of eternity!
I cant wait to see if it makes it. How do you think we'll get on? Cassianto (talk) 17:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reviewer left comments. Most of them request more references, for example, references to replace the IMDB refs. I added a couple of suggestions, but I can't do much. I hope Cassianto can find some. Please take a look and see if you can easily answer any of the concerns. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim thanks for your comments. In relation to Mary Poppins claim on SH I have had to delete the claim owing to the fact I cannot find a reliable source after a few hours of searching. I believe the only place this is mentioned is on IMDB which simply wont do. I have reverted an Ancestry.co.uk ref in favour of freebmd.org.uk as advised by Pyrotec. Could you check I have worded the ref correctly (ref 9) and if so I will continue with the others. If you find it incorrect could you fix and I will use the future freebmd refs in a similar wording. Many thanks Cassianto (talk) 15:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim. I'm currently GA reviewing this. Can I request that you read it and offer your thoughts? I'm not convinced the prose is up to scratch.♦ Dr. Blofeld11:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim riley, I want to thank you for all your time and patience in helping me make Stanley Holloway a Good Article. Without your help and guidance the article would certainly not be what it is today. After my initially troublesome start, it was you who restored my faith in Wikipedia by taking the time to improve the article whilst treating me in a friendly and resilient manner. I would also like to thank you for all your valuable and respected advice along the way. I would therefore feel honoured if you would accept this barnstar as a token of my thanks. Cassianto (talk) 18:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tim - Thanks again for your extreme moral support. I have to say that that 'Mikado in the mud' discussion set my head racing with questions about different cultural connotations, and it seems to have encouraged me to turn my editorial gaze to something else a bit... as they say... "crossover": namely, the enigma that was Will Marion Cook. And, unsurprisingly perhaps, Cook led me straight into the notes of Percy Grainger and his In Dahomey (Cakewalk Smasher)! I trust I haven't rambled too far off topic this time (though the new section title is truly horrible, I know). Btw, I can't help but notice the star Percy Grainger page doesn't appear to contain some of Percy's favourite musical terms, like "ramble" and "house music". Maybe I should pluck up boldness to raise the question on the Discussion page... --MistyMorn (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm finding my feet again after a couple of weeks away, and I remember that I said I would look at the nature of the Bizet/Offenbach relationship as presented by the former's biographers. Winton Dean doesn't say much, but Bizet's earlier biographer Mina Curtiss is illuminating. While as a student Bizet was pleased and flattered to be invited to Offenbach's social gatherings, it seems that later in life he had less respect for his former mentor. Curtiss quotes a letter written by Bizet to his friend Paul Lacombe in 1871. The issue in question is the preoccupation of Paris's opera house directors with Offenbach's work to the evident detriment of everyone else's, including Bizet's Grisélidis and Djamileh. Bizet writes: "All the producers of good music must redouble their efforts to fight against the ever-inceasing invasion of that infernal Offenbach. The creature, not satisfied with his Roi-Carotte at the Gaité, is going to bestow on us a Fantasio at the Opéra-Comique". In the same letter he calls Offenbach's Barkouf "an obscenity". Now, Bizet was famous for his fits of temper, and maybe was just sounding off, but such sentiments don't exactly square with the picture of a sustained and happy friendship based on a mutual respect. You may want to add a qualifying sentence. If you want to quote the Lacombe letter I can provide full citation details. Incidentally, I note the interesting comment re Percy, made by your earlier correspondent above. He has a good point, and I will certainly respond on the talkpage if he raises the matter there. I will also look at Royal Opera, London in a day or two. (Incidentally, I think the Offenbach article is generally in excellent shape.) Brianboulton (talk) 22:27, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The publication details are: Curtiss, Mina (1959). Bizet and His World. London: Secker and Warburg. The letter to Lacombe is quoted extensively on pp. 311–12. Lacombe was a minor composer, an almost exact contemporary of Bizet's who has not yet been graced with an English WP article, though the French Wikipedia has this. Hope this helps. Brianboulton (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blessings shall reward you. Paul Lacombe, forsooth! I wrote the en:wp article on Paul Lacome and now you tell me there's a Paul Lacombe as well. I shall have to run up an exiguous article on him, I suppose. But most grateful withal. Tim riley (talk) 20:40, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Lacome amd Lacombe, born around the same time, died around the same time, both active composers - what are the chances of that? On the matter in question (Bizet and Offenbach), my researches simply don't support the suggestion that the pair were close friends, nor that Bixet loved Offenbach's work. I am not going to dwell on the relationship in the Bizet article (there's not a lot to dwell on), and will only mention the Lacombe letter by way of a footnote, but it would be good to have consistency between the two articles. Brianboulton (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, it passed. I listed it under Theatre, film and drama like the old Vic, Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:37, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Superb work with Royal Opera, London. If you want to nominate it sometime I'd be happy to review it. I gather you are still preparing it.♦ Dr. Blofeld20:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, ha, I know how difficult it is to spot one's own typos... I even found today that I'd unwittingly been calling 'Will Marion Cook' "Will Marion Smith" on my own user page [blushes]. Actually, I confess I was browsing your recent articles to see what you are doing and to try to learn something (viz. pinch ideas, such as how to handle the second and third section headings here). I enjoyed reading your articles on Joseph Bennett and the English Musical Renaissance and, as a layman, I found that I learned a lot from them. I am also humbled by how swiftly you compose. In reply to your request for feedback: I just wondered about the exact scope of the article. I know it's presumably a work in progress and that there'll be more to come. At present, it seems to focus entirely on the narrower definition linked to Bennett's coinage of the term 'English musical renaissance', as taken up by Maitland, to the apparent exclusion of the somewhat broader usage that I suspect has become common currency. Just a passing thought... But if I do happen to stumble upon any more typos here or in the Royal Opera House, I'll certainly shout... Arrivederci! --MistyMorn (talk) 17:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Tim riley. You have new messages at Newwhist's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I've just made my first 'Did you know?' submission. Wik ignorant as I am, I've posted some three days over the limit. But given the timeless issues, I reckoned it might just be worth saving for ephimera... Anyway, if it happens to interest you at all, the nomination template is hinc (if not exactly nunc).
Thanks for your reply on my user page Tim - much appreciated as ever. My fear that the nomination was going to get lost in the "out of date" archived pile proved to be unfounded as it has now received a very thoughtful review to which I've cobbled together some sort of a late night reply. Of course, do feel free to communicate in Attic Greek... I won't understand a word, but could take it as an excuse to respond in blasphemous Italian (from Magna Grecia or wherever!). Saluti--MistyMorn (talk) 22:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The results of the RFC are clear that G&S articles are not exempt from infoboxes, please respect that process. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2011
(UTC)
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
Hi, Tim, are you resting? If not, can I return to the question of the Bizet-Offenbach relationship? The statement in the Offenbach article that "Bizet became, and remained, a devoted friend of Offenbach" appears to be cited to Mina Curtiss's Musical Quarterly article "Bizet, Offenbach and Rossini". Can you advise me what Curtiss actually says, since her biography refers to the relationship in quite different terms (per the Lacombe letter)? Winton Dean, Bizet's most assiduous biographer, has little to say beyond a brief reference to Bizet's "resentment" at Offenbach's preferential treatment. So I'm puzzled by this apparent report that they were in fact great buddies. Brianboulton (talk) 11:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What ho! Back now. I'll certainly be making the necessary changes to the Offenbach article, which still has a lot to be done before it is ready for FAC. I'm sending a copy of the Curtiss article, which is interesting on Bizet's relations with Rossini, too. Tim riley (talk) 07:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back, and thanks for the email of the Curtiss article which I shall devour. The Bizet article is creaking towards the PR stage - by the weekend I hope. Brianboulton (talk) 23:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the article doesn't use book notes, each references is a full citation. Surely you don't think it feasible to merge 3-5 whole reference into one citation?♦ Dr. Blofeld18:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do indeed, and have often done so in my own contributions. It makes each reference very long, admittedly, but only one reader in a hundred will bother to look at the refs in any case, and for the other 99 it means they aren't hit in the eye with three or four ref numbers while trying to read your excellent article (which, let me say, I found gripping from first to last). Tim riley (talk) 18:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Its not actually my article. I just came across it in browsing and thought it very interesting and a very informative insight into the subject which could be worthy of a GA. However, you've persuaded me otherwise. OK say there are four cluster references. If each one has a name tag and is used in different places throughout the article, how do I put them all in one ref? Because they need four different tag names to support the sources where they are used elsewhere in the article.♦ Dr. Blofeld11:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I ought to have looked more closely before pontificating. Where there are multiple references of that kind I'd be inclined to keep the first and lose the rest. Thus in "The [[United States Capitol]] is considered one of the most haunted buildings in Washington.<ref name="French">[http://books.google.com/books?id=wvxJAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false French, Joseph Lewis. ''The Best Ghost Stories.''] New York: Boni and Liveright, Inc., 1919.</ref><ref name="Mather">[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/31/national/main581269.shtml Cosgrove-Mather, Bootie. "Haunted House On The Hill."] CBS News. October 31, 2003.</ref>" the French reference surely suffices and the Mather one can be pruned. Happy to help on the pruning if you like. Tim riley (talk) 11:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yep I think I'll just ditch the excess refs, although its gonna take a lot of effort to ensure the citations below are not affected by removing them and finding where they are!
Good gracious me! You've done wonders in an astoundingly short time. I have added my comments and applause to the GAN page. You deserve a medal for services to this article. Tim riley (talk) 14:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see that I missed the PR (resolutely avoiding the Internet while on holiday in Crete), but I've finally got round to going through the article and I have a few comments about this and that. Do you want them now (well, tomorrow), or should I wait until FAC? --GuillaumeTell21:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The BBCTV series "The House" deserves its own article, don't you think? There's some information at IMDB and probably more elsewhere. I could knock something up fairly quickly if you like.
That would be splendid: many thanks. It happened to be on during a period of my life when I didn't have a television set (ghastly little snob that I was), so I am not up to speed really. Tim riley (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In connexion with the above, I see that there's no article for Nicholas Payne, who was Director of Opera at the ROH from 1993-98. Since the article is specifically about The Royal Opera, it would be good if previous and future Directors of Opera (e.g. Elaine Padmore (how's your Danish?) and now Kasper Holten) could be listed with dates and, perhaps, comments. (I'm not sure when the title was created).
Blast! I was already conscious that this was a bit of a gap, and was hoping no-one would notice. I don't systematically keep old ROH programmes, and I can't think where else I could get this info. Any suggestions? Tim riley (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No mention of the first British performances of Jenůfa (Kubelik, 1956) at the ROH.
Opera in English: I'm fairly sure that some operas are still occasionally performed in English, e.g. The Bartered Bride and The Cunning Little Vixen both conducted by Sir Charles Mackerras (not mentioned at all in the article) not long before his death, and, less recently, The Carmelites in 1983. Poulenc, I seem to remember, wanted it always to be performed in the language of the audience.
"Prom performances" ought to be explained, as people might think that there is some connexion with The Proms. Talking of the latter, did the visits to the Proms really last for "many years"? How many? I can't remember hearing or seeing anything about them.
Somewhere, I spotted "organization" - does this count as British English these days?
It does in The Times, which still maddeningly clings to H.W. Fowler's pedantic precept that words taken from the Greek have –ize endings but words filtered through French are –ise. Wahn! There are two "izes" within Times quotes in the article. Tim riley (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Bit of a ragbag, I'm afraid, but the article is in generally good shape (though perhaps a bit too much about the recent past as against the long-ago?). I'll have another look-through and may have a few more comments. Feel free to reply and/or query here - you're on my watchlist so no need for the talkback flummery. --GuillaumeTell17:57, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ragbags as good as this are a boon and a blessing. Many thanks. I agree with all your points and will be acting on them as best I can before presenting myself at the bar of FAC. Tim riley (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that I've now thought of a few more points - will list them below later this evening and probably add a comment to one or two of your responses above. Meanwhile, one problem that I've been pondering is the likelihood that drive-by editors may wish to add their favourite ROH singers (currently 61), conductors (27), composers (35), operas (48), directors (only 9 - where is Richard Jones?) and/or designers (currently a big fat zero) to the article. There's therefore a bit of a question about what the criteria for inclusion ought to be. I also note that there's a rather noticeable bulge in operas near the end of the article..... --GuillaumeTell21:34, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go - random list as previously:
No mention of Jette Parker (formerly Alberto Vilar ...) Young Artists programme. They're doing Il viaggio a Reims next summer.
Nor the not-entirely-successful Edward Downes attempt to perform all of Verdi's operas, including early versions, to celebrate (I think) the centenary of his death.
Should summer seasons of Russian operas (e.g. Semyon Kotko, War and Peace, Boris Godunov) performed by Gergiev and the Mariinsky Opera at the ROH in 2000 and 2005 get a mention?
No mention of Lord Chadlington (at least by name) who was involved in the great post-"The House" goings-on.
Worth mentioning Paul Bunyan, performed at the Shaftesbury Theatre during the Opera House shutdown; also (I'm sure about this - it's in Michael Kaiser's book!) the cancellation of Le Grand Macabre which was to open the refurbished Opera House, because the stage machinery wasn't working properly.
Comment on the Linbury: a small number of Royal Opera productions, e.g. Powder Her Face, have been performed there, but mostly the repertory is things like Birtwistle's "Punch and Judy" performed by small companies such as Music Theatre Wales and The Opera Group. Dunno about the ballet, but that's not part of this article.
Hello Tim - While you were visiting the dreaming crags of the north (welcome back, btw!), a musical RfC issue arose under the banner headline "Every album by notable musician gets own article". Initially, few participants in the discussion counted classical music among their interests, leading to a rather pop-oriented debate. I think the discussion is now a bit more balanced, but I promised to notify you in case you felt like contributing some of your ever interesting observations. Concerns had been raised by some of us in the classical music project group about articles merely providing track listings of classical records which a user happens to like or somehow support. Some of us also felt that the term 'album' isn't particularly helpful in classical music, where records generally provide performances of a pre-existing score, although not everyone supports that view. Ravpapa, Milkunderwood and now Lawrence Khoo have all made alternative proposals to try to take into account issues felt to be specific to classical music. If you have any views of your own which you would like to express, could post—initially at least—in the space set aside for 'uninvolved editors', here? Thanks. Best wishes--MistyMorn (talk) 13:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, it's always a pleasure to read what you've been working on. I find the Fauré piano page quite excellent.
Georges Bizet has limped over the line at peer review. I shall probably continue with my endless tweaking and shuffling of content, but it's really time I had another opinion. So, whenever you can spare the time I'd be most grateful. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your fifth comment on that talk page refers to "No edit warring". I'd like to draw your attention to the "Titles in pretence" section on the same page. In my opinion, there has been no serious engagement with my summary of the situation. Your input would be welcome. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, such as it is, an expression of an individual dissenting view on an article talk page does not constitute an edit war. The question is, is the article stable - not being changed, re-changed and changed back again at regular intervals, and on that test there is no problem. Tim riley (talk) 20:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Someone is trying to rename lots of opera categories, a G&S category and others. See this. Please take a careful look at this, as I think you may have objections. Note that many of these changes are hidden - you need to click on the "show" buttons. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Henry Wood (1869–1944) was an English conductor best known for his association with London's annual series of promenade concerts, known as the Proms. Wood started his career as an organist. During his studies at the Royal Academy of Music, he came under the influence of the voice teacher Manuel Garcia and became his accompanist. After similar work for Richard D'Oyly Carte's opera companies on the works of Arthur Sullivan and others, Wood became the conductor of a small operatic touring company. From the mid-1890s until his death, Wood focused on concert conducting. He was engaged by the impresario Robert Newman to conduct a series of promenade concerts at the Queen's Hall, offering a mixture of classical and popular music at low prices. By the 1920s, Wood had steered the repertoire entirely to classical music. In addition to the Proms, he conducted concerts and festivals throughout the country and also trained the student orchestra at the Royal Academy of Music. He had an enormous influence on the musical life of Britain over his long career: he and Newman greatly improved access to classical music, and Wood raised the standard of orchestral playing and nurtured the taste of the public, presenting a vast repertoire of music spanning four centuries. (more...)
Hi Tim great to hear from you.
Wow! Yes I do find that very useful. Without the fear of being accused of plagiarism, I will duly add bits and bobs to the HC article using this. It would be great to work with you again so I will gladly take you up on your kind offer. Cassianto (talk) 11:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was good to see old Wood on the front page the other day. This is just to let you know that poor Georges ia now at FAC. Knowing his record of bad luck and underachievement, I'm not particularly hopeful. Brianboulton (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tim riley! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Tim, Could you please check over what I have done on the HC article. I have revamped it entirely using the Oxford Dictionary National Biography link which you kindly told me about, but have been unable to reference them in an a,b,c,d,e,f... format. Hope it's O.K, all the best! Cassianto (talk) 21:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for that, I will keep your last message and try it on an article I started, maybe Mark Sheridan. Reference formatting is one of the things I struggle with I'm afraid but your advice will defenatly help. Images of Harry are scarce so I only have the one which is void of copyright, the one you see. If you have any then it would be great if you could add them. Thanks again Tim Cassianto (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, I'll get onto it right away. I have found a press cutting of the taxi business issued in the "Tottenham Journal" from 1922 which I will add. I moved your image up slightly in order to make way for the one I'm about to add, hope you dont mind. One other thing, should the song titles be in italics? I have been deliberating about it all day having looked at WP:MOS. I opted for bold in the end. Is this the norm? Cassianto (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim hope your well, re the above, I have finished. Could you please take a glance and fix anything which is glaringly obvious All the best Cassianto (talk) 19:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I love the underrated for some reason. All my subjects are mainly of great people who were deemed as the underdog compared to others in their field of work, but invariable were often better!
Holloway Vs Guiness, Olivier, Ustinov etc
Champion Vs Lloyd, Laurel, Leno etc
My interest in Maufe stems from a trip to Guildford with my mother whilst on a jolly with the National Association of Retired Police Officers to honour my father who died a few years ago. Whilst there we visited the Cathedral and I saw a rather feeble attempt at a biography written by someone who clearly had sand in their eyes! So, in order to learn more about him, I had a look on Wikipedia. To my frustrations this was just as bad. So I set about improving it. This was the only reason and although his buildings are not as impressive as the bricks and mortar of say Christopher Wren, John Adam or even more recently Norman Foster, the fellow certainly still deserves a decent biography. Love the story by the way it would never have happened if he'd stayed Muff (but then I imagine that would be an entirely different story altogether!!) all the best Cassianto (talk) 20:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, Could you take a look at the main Maufe picture in the lead. It has been nominated for deletion as I put the wrong licence on it. Not sure what to do to halt proceedings Cassianto (talk) 16:41, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, thanks for that, I will play devils advocate on this one and say I think your both correct in what you say. I only wish I could have my 10 pennies worth and offer my thoughts on it (i dont have a clue!!). Unfortunately, like a true Brit I shall sit firmly on the fence on this one and let the great minds battle it out regardless Cassianto (talk) 11:32, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, do you have a reliable source that will provide details of Sadler's Wells/ENO's repertory during the 1970s and 80s? I don't think this qualifies, though it has some of the info I need. Brianboulton (talk) 00:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On 11 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hans Spialek, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Hans Spialek, after studying music while a Russian prisoner of war during World War I, orchestrated 147 American musicals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hans Spialek.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks for the invite, but I know hardly anything about his piano music (except the hilarious Bayreuth quadrilles). (I have seen Pénélope, however - very enjoyable.) Oddly enough, I listened yesterday morning to Radio 3's comparison of all the available versions of the Nocturnes - did you hear that? If not, it'll be on the R3 website and you might add a footnote to the effect that the winner was ye olde mono recording by Germaine Thyssens-Valentin and there were several good runners-up. I'd never knowingly heard any of the nocturnes before and I'm afraid that they didn't do much for me. Royal Opera - yes, I saw that you'd moved my comments to the Talk page, so surmised that you might be doing something before long. Have you had a look at The House (television documentary)? Best. --GuillaumeTell12:21, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim – I find your new article on Germaine Thyssens-Valentin anything but scrappy: already a fine addition regarding a fascinating figure.
In order to mention that her Nocturnes disc also won a Gramophone Award, I've pulled your closing sentence around a bit. So you may want to copy edit. Best,--MistyMorn (talk) 15:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
May I just drop a line to admire your work on the Stephen Potter page? I am an admirer and longterm reader of this writer and if there are any issues on that page that you think need addressing, I will try and do so in between work and other commitments. I have most but not all of his books: DH Lawrence, Gamesmanship, Lifemanship, One-Upmanship, Supermanship, The Sense of Humour, Potter in America, Anti-Woo, The Complete Golf Gamesmanship and Steps to Immaturity, plus the Alan Jenkins biography. I think that one task that needs to be done is to track down any available audio recordings of his work as a BBC radio producer. Anyway, just wanted to say that that page has come on a great deal, and it seems to be mostly thanks to you. Lexo (talk) 02:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, I took it at Guildford Cathedral. It was part of a private display, exhibited by the bishop in charge. I asked him before I took it and explained my intentions. He was chuffed! I also have another one, an oil portrait of Maufe, but I preferred the picture...Not only that but I think we have run out of room! Cassianto (talk) 17:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for doing the review. The comments don't point towards anything too onerous to revise, so I think it'll be in a good article status soon. OttawaAC (talk) 22:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, I have had a major edit of the above and wondered if you had anything to add. Ssilvers has done a small ce of the lede and I thought that, if this is your bag, you might like to take a look. All the best. Cassianto (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim - Do you know of a reliable source I can use to reference SH stage shows? I feel as if this is the last job to do on this now before for I can submit it to possible WP:FAN. The other little niggle is the subscription only refs for which I believe there are two. Any idea's - Cassianto (talk) 13:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind giving this a look-over at PR? Embarrassingly, since I started editing on the main page three weeks ago, not a single other editor has made so much as a smudge on the page, not even one of those annoying opera project people who go around changing the order of sections. So it badly needs some fresh eyes, if you can manage it. Brianboulton (talk) 21:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
it's good to see your sane contribution and involvement the ongoing discussion about the spelling of P.I.T's name. Wanted to let you know that I for one appreciate what you're doing, though I'm sure plenty of others do too. All best, Alfietucker (talk) 14:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, hope you're well. If you have a minute could you take a look at the article archive for the above as I need a ref addressing. It relates to the Gaye book (and I have been reliably informed you own a copy). Thanks in advance -- Cassianto (talk) 00:23, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the correction on the above. I have one other question. I have managed to scan all census, birth, marriage and death records for everything which is referenced under FREE BMD on SH article. I have had to do this as the FA reviewer is having some issues with it not being considered as a Reliable Source. I consider these scans to be very much reliable and wish to add them to the ref's section. How do I go about adding them, as at the moment they are in my pictures on my computer and need to be attached to some sort of site for all to see as per the reference. I think I am quite close to getting my first FA with this now being the last issue for this initial review. It would be great if you could advise me about this and I would be most thankful. All the best -- Cassianto (talk) 19:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tim, thanks for getting back to me. Are you reffering to Bluap's comments? This confused me somewhat initially. Yes he/she is right. The scan of the front page on FreeBMD could be used, but it gives little information and is only good for establishing the fact SH was born in East Ham, which in itself is a big area. If there is a way to scan the certificates so it leads to a link which enables the reader to look at the genuine records first hand, then I think that would be better than having a generic and slightly ambiguous front page to a record which gives little detail. I don't think Bluap was aware at the time of posting his comment, that I had the original scans to the original records and he/she was trying to direct me into using the FreeBMD page as a second best option. I think that if we have them then we should absolutely use them as you cannot get more reliable than the genuine articles. Failing that, citing them in a proper Wiki Format would be just as good. What are your thoughts? Best regards -- Cassianto (talk) 19:36, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am researching Monteverdi's lost operas (which some might say are best left that way). There are around seven of them, from which the music exists for a single aria, "Arianna's lament". Digging around Google I have identified a few JSTOR articles that could be relevant, and I wonder if you can help me access any of these?
On a different matter, for some reason I have not been able to upload the Pêcheurs image you sent me. Is there any chance that you could do this (no hurry, the article will be at PR for another week at least)? Many thanks anyway
Monteverdi: will do. Watch your email inbox. (This really is like asking Herod to act as librarian for the NSPCC)
Image: shall do at once. I'll pop it into the article behind a pillar, and you can move it somewhere more prominent if you think it worth it. Tim riley (talk) 17:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the image. I have placed it in the Music section for the moment; might rethink. Many thanks, too, for your altruistic searches for material on the dreaded Claudio. Brianboulton (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on the promotion of this very well-designed article. It is efficient, informative and engaging, telling an interested reader just enough about this body of work. Well done! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:38, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. I'm just gearing up to launch this on an unsuspecting world, once I've added some commentary. Apart from Lord N's book I have at least another four, plus programmes going back to the year dot and some other sources, and I wondered if you might be interested in collaborating on an improvement drive - either on the Festival or its creator, or both?
Inter alia, you'll see from the above listing that Sir Thomas actually conducted one opera for them, albeit in Edinburgh; he was also scheduled to conduct Zauberflöte (in 1960) but wasn't sufficiently well and Colin Davis took over. I can provide refs if you think that this is worth adding.
While I'm here, and totally off-topic, I'll be in London for Meistersinger next Monday and won't be returning home until Tuesday mid-afternoon. Might you be free for lunch or a drink or something-or-other that day? Probably best to discuss this by email. --GuillaumeTell23:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source for "Strauss's songs have always been popular with audiences and performers, and are generally considered – along with many of his other compositions – to be masterpieces of the first rank."? Your edit summary got truncated! Thanks - Pointillist (talk) 12:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, quick question...is findagrave a RS? The reason I ask is because Ssilvers has told me it might not be and I know I use it often in articles. Hope your well. -- Cassianto (talk) 11:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(This historic image shows Brian, on the right, requesting a peer review from Malleus Fatuorum, on the left. The spirit of SandyGeorgia hovers between them.) Brianboulton (talk) 15:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(I hope this won't get me blocked)
– and belated congrats on the promotion of the Fauré piano article.
Tim, help needed... See my talk page re the above [7]. All images are under scrutiny. Not looking good as I know nothing about images, only how to upload them with, what I think are the correct licences -- Cassianto (talk) 12:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When you recently edited Thomas Bowdler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conington (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.
Hi Tim, I have been remiss in not looking more at your Piano music of Gabriel Fauré. (I haven't had as much time or energy for the Wikipedia recently, and even when I do, it's so very easy to get sidetracked and neglect things.) It's not an area for which I have much to contribute, although I enjoy the recordings that I have, very much enjoyed your article, and liked your approach to it. It's a very nice addition. Thanks! --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tim, I just dropped in to leave you the above message, but late to the party I would also like to congratulate on your superb Fauré article - another one of my favourite composers (not from my home town though!). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. My name is Jivesh. One month ago, I contacted Sandy to ask her for some very good copy-editors. Some of her friends suggested User:Brianboulton to me. I talked to him and many other editors but everyone seems to be busy since the past few weeks. Brian asked me if I have contacted you. As I hadn't, I came to request you to copy-edit "Halo (Beyoncé Knowles song)" before I take it to FAC for the fourth time? A friend of mine took it there the first free times but it never passed. Then I worked on it. I would be very grateful if you could help. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just waiting for the green light from Jappalang on the remaing images now Tim. None yet but if there is I'll come running! All the best to you and your family for 2012 -- Cassianto (talk) 18:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Your submission of James Walker (conductor) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Done - and only sysops/admins can delete pages/images. Skier Dude (talk) 07:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
. If you are in town on Saturday, do drop by the V&A. Cheers Fæ (talk) 11:21, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
.jpg)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:George-grove.jpg){kind=link}
