This is an
archive of inactive discussions.
Don't let me distract you from Shakespeare, but I thought you might be interested in seeing where King James has got to now (ie. how much the article has changed). The styles and honours were added very recently, and I wonder what you think of that Gunpowder plot paragraph? Anyway, what I really wanted to share with you is his poem on the Great Comet of 1618. What do you think? Carcharoth 14:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm still in Canada. I notice the application is in progress. Is there anything I need to do? Tom Reedy 22:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I saw the comment. He is a 15-year-old Korean student. You might want to wait for more commnets before you change the reading level too much. Nobody else seems to have a problem with it and it's about as simple as it can get without becoming condescending--about the level of a daily newspaper. Tom Reedy 01:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and I don't really understand how to "sign the nom". Tom Reedy 01:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
We're doing very well in our application. Is this what you anticipated? RedRabbit 01:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I've just finished reviewing the full WS article and I must say I'm impressed with the work you've put in there. Finally venturing off the safe pond of purely personal biographical detail and onto the murky waters of literary critcism, I found the text of those sections were now actually comprehensible to a mere mortal. Outstanding work!-- Xover 21:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I had a look at the "funambulous Frenchman" footnote, but failed to penetrate the meaning of the quote. Since you can't see the poem (which is strange, as it should be accessible), I thought I'd type it out here before I go and read about Shakespeare...
James I of England's poem on the Great Comet of 1618:
Yee men of Brittayne wherefore gaze ye so,
Vpon an angry starre? When as yee knowe
The Sun must turne to darke, the Moone to bloodde,
And then t'will bee to late to turne to good.
O bee so happy then whilst time doth last,
As to remember Doomesday is not past:
And misinterpret not with vayne conceyte
The character you see of Heauen's heighte:
Which though it bringe the Worlde some newes from fate,
The letter is such as none can it translate:
And for to guesse at God Almighties minde
Were such a thinge might cosen all mankinde:
Therefore I wish the curious man to Keepe
His rash imaginations until hee sleepe:
Then let him dreame of famine, plague, and warre;
And think the match with Spayne hath rays'de this starre:
And let him thinke that I theyr Prince, and Mynion
Will shortly change, or which is worse, religion:
And that hee may haue nothing else to feare,
Let him walke Paules and meete the diuell there:
Or if hee bee a Puritane and scapes,
Jesuites salute him in theyr proper shapes:
These Jealousies I would not haue bee treason
For him whose fancy ouer-rules his reason.
But to bee sure hee did no hurte, t'were fitt,
Hee should bee bold to pray for no more witt,
But onely to conceale his dreame: for there
Are they that would believe all hee dares feare.
-Jacobus Rex
Quoted from here, in the Journal of the British Astronomical Association (JBAA) [published in 1987 in volume 97:2]. Carcharoth 00:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
So, can you explain any of the references he makes in the poem? I get the reference to the Spanish Match, but the "walke Paules and meete the diuell there" is a bit opaque for me. Is that a reference to Paul on the road to Damascus, and meeting the devil and changing (or confirming) one's religion? And I'm not 100% certain, but is the bit at the end saying, "I don't mind what religion you are, as long as you conceal it"?? A learned king calming his frightened and superstitious populace while one of the most spectacular comets in history flames overhead? Carcharoth 00:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Anne popped up on my watchlist when you carried out this edit. So I did a Google search for "funambulous Frenchman", and the top two results were Anne and Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Sarah Trimmer. Now I begin to understand more clearly! :-) Anyway, wiktionary does have the required words: wikt:funambulate, wikt:funambulation and wikt:funambulist. Google suggested I wanted "funambulus", which took me full circle back to here. A bit late, but maybe James's language in the poem will be as fertile a source of Jacobean linguistic oddities? Carcharoth 15:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm just passing through, as usual, but I am in awe of your work on the Shakespeare article. I've just made a few small edits which I hope are OK, and the one thing that I wanted to raise is He signed legal documents as "William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon", which I feel needs a ref.
I thought about trying to integrate the Speculation section into the Life, where I (and, I think, you) thought it ought to be, but then I blenched [blench, to turn aside, to turn aside from what is right, to flinch - C J Sisson's glossary in my Complete Works]. If no-one's done it by my bedtime, though, I might have a go.
Best wishes, and keeping my fingers crossed for the FA result, which is looking, uh, hopeful. -- GuillaumeTell 17:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
I read the article in three sittings during the first nom. I read it in one sitting during this week, which is a credit to how far it has come since. Anyway, thats not why I'm here; can I ask that you perform one of your patented forensic dissections on Symphony No. 3 (Górecki). I would really appreciate it, and you need not be gentle, all suggestions or criticisms welcome. Ceoil 18:04, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
And by the way I'm spending my time these days between Poland, Holland, and Ireland, and I followed that FAC at the time, saw the difficulties, and understood that you could not turn to Yeats. Ceoil 18:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of High Culture | |
I commend your hard work on William Shakespeare. Choosing to edit such a high-profile, controversial and research-intensive article is a mark of patience, perseverance and dedication to Wikipedia that is rarely seen. Wikipedia clearly needs more editors such as yourself. RedRabbit 17:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC) |
You deserved another. RedRabbit 17:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I know that you are probably overwhelmed with the Shakespeare FAC right now, but if you get any time in the next week or so, I would urge you to review Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough. It is up for FA and is quite good. The article is worthy of your careful scrutiny. Awadewit | talk 12:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought you might be interested in this article vaguely related to Shakespeare (it is really about the writing of history). Awadewit | talk 09:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Have you, an Englishman, ever heard the idiom "no worries"? I am seeing it posted more frequently on the internet from English and Americans, and I know it is of Austrlian origin. Perhaps this all comes down to Neighbours, a show we export but don't actually watch. RedRabbit 15:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I am pleased to see that there is someone on FAC besides Yannismarou actually evaluating content; I was beginning to conclude that it had collapsed into the hands of the people inventing rules for the MOS.
Could you have a look at the above article, now in FAC? I would like to have some substantive comments. (I find the paragraphs bunchy myself; but I don't think anything can be done about that until FA is over. If you agree, please say so on the article talk page.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say thanks for the detailed copyedit on Ine of Wessex; I really appreciate it. Mike Christie (talk) 02:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your message, some time back. Do you know about Charles Thomas and his interpretation of an inscribed stone found at Tiltagel, please. If so, please add to the new article on Thomas. Best wishes Vernon White - TALK PAGE 21:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much, both for the valued support, and for the compliments that accompanied it. Both are much appreciated. It's a great pleasure to get you to review one of my articles; I know it'll be work, and I know it'll be worth it. Thank you.
I have replied to your note on geography at my talk page; I wanted to post a note here to make sure you saw my thanks. I should add that I am indeed working on Egbert of Wessex. I don't by any means have it in shape yet, but when I do, would you be interested in giving me feedback prior to FAC? Oh, and on Wimborne, haven't found anything yet -- I'll drop you a note if I do. Mike Christie (talk) 02:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could help me copyedit this article of mine. I know you've seen it before. I wrote most of it months ago when I was less familiar with wikipedia writing style, so it is kind of a mess. I really don't know where to start. I'm trying to get it to GA, for now, so it doesn't have to be perfect, just "good-enough". Anyway, I would appreciate your help, or, if you can direct me to another good copyeditor, that would be great. Thanks, Wrad 04:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi -- I'm working on Egbert of Wessex, and haven't had any luck looking for a ref for the information on Egbert's bones in this paragraph. The editor who added it said they thought they got it from Kings, Queens, Bones & Bastards by David Hilliam. Sutton Publisihing, 1998; I don't have it and there's no preview available on Google Books. I can't find anything else in Google Books that gives the story. Do you happen to have anything that mentions this? It's a nice story, and I would hate to pull out the quote; I'd probably order the book via a library loan first. But if you have something that can source this that would be great.
Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 02:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
If you have time, another question -- Raedburh/Redburga. The article on Egbert currently says "Egbert married Redburga, a Frankish princess (possibly a sister or sister-in-law of the emperor Charlemagne), and had two sons and a daughter." I can't find any mention of her, or the children other than Aethelwulf, in anything I've got or anything that looks reliable on Google Books. I assume this is one of those bits of information that comes solely from a cryptic reference in the Annals of St. Bertin or something like that. Do you have any idea what the source is for this? Mike Christie (talk) 10:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
If you have the time and the inclination, I'd be glad of any additional feedback that occurs to you on Egbert. I've now added everything I've got a source for, removed everything unsourced, and rewritten the lead. I think the organization is now right. The only thing I know is missing is something on the coinage during Egbert's time; I don't have good refs for that stuff but I'm hopeful that Angus will be able to help there, as I see he's been scanning old numismatic pictures into Aldfrith. I've looked for more on Cornish placenames, but I don't have anything to add to what you've already done. I will be working on making the references consistent, and cleaning up any wikilinking problems, and probably a final copyedit. Any input you have time for would be much appreciated. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, could you comment on Thoughts on the Education of Daughters at its FAC? It hasn't drawn a lot of interest, being a conduct book. Awadewit | talk 17:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
You should definitely nominate this article for "Did You Know". I'd be happy to make a 100x100px crop of the portrait to go with it. - PKM 23:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I may have a good library, but you've been to the Uffizi... And I don't have the Yates, so thanks for the pointer.
I'll start it shortly, madness at the office this week, working late, yada yada ... - PKM 17:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Qp10qp, I have fixed the wikEd dashes issue, please see User_talk:Cacycle/wikEd#Dashes. Cacycle 02:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 04:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
well done. I wondered what had gone wrong. AndyJones 12:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your careful attention to detail on Honoré de Balzac. – Scartol · Talk 22:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Your comments would be much appreciated at this discussion regarding the Mary Wollstonecraft featured topic. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 07:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello there. Sorry to bug you, but I'm looking for guidance on a question about an image. I'm currently helping Al Ameer son work on Yasser Arafat, and the article mentions Arafat's appearance on the cover of the Dec. 13, 1968 Time. Can we include this in the article under the fair use rationale? I've never done a fair-use image, so I figured I'd ask someone who is very knowledgeable. Thanks in advance for your help. – Scartol · Talk 21:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I always argued that front page articles should be protected; I am actaully suprised this article has attracted so little vandalism and disruption so far.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I just couldn't stop....Next time I'll know better than to grade and edit simultaneously. Catastrophe. Awadewit | talk 12:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Sad day ... want any? [1] SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
In pages 108-109, of Stefano Ticozzi it distinguishes them and notes that both were Florentines and working at Fountainbleu; it is quite possible that time has created two individuals from one original. All I can go by for now is Ticozzi, sometimes Getty ULAN can clarify. Googlebooks has only digitized the second volume of Michael Bryans dictionary of painters and engravers.. CARAVAGGISTI 04:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, perhaps you could comment on A Vindication of the Rights of Men? It is currently up for FAC here. Thanks. (I see Shakespeare is going to be on the main page - congratulations!?) Awadewit | talk 22:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
You are going rather beyond what Blunt actually says, are you not? Johnbod 01:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I had checked the main text, but not the footnotes, which I have just been doing. Nonetheless, "technical incompetence" needs qualifying - Duvet is a very skilled engraver indeed, or the prints would look like mush. But his figure drawing is not great, and his compositional ideas - clearly wholly deliberate - are very personal. Johnbod 02:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it does sound convincing. Sir Carchlock strikes again! A brilliant discovery about "Walke Pauls", I must say! And there was me trying to be all William Empson about it. What an odd place to go for news, though, a cathedral. Of course, churches were dens of iniquity in those days, now I come to think about it. Pepys used to go to different ones each week according to which woman he wanted to chat up, which he did during the sermon. It was almost the only chance there was to get a respectable lady at your mercy.
Catherine de' Medici was also very interested in comets, I've been finding out. She had this tower (right) built for her astronomers to study the sky from. Looks a bit puny now, doesn't it; but it was quite something in its day. qp10qp 17:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, perhaps you could help us figure out what to delete and what to keep over at the Joseph Priestley peer review. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 22:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
See new addition to Letters Written in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. Do you think the person is trying to help or self-promoting? I left an unfortunate message on their talk page which I tried to rectify. I know you can cite yourself, but... Awadewit | talk 22:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm so sorry I couldn't help you out at Shakespeare. I've been so sick for the past two days. And I still have to teach. You know how that goes. I hope the article will soon be restored to its old self. Awadewit | talk 17:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, could you respond to Roger? He has taken the AE/BE debate to the MOS pages. I am too sick to deal with that right now. No wiki-stress for me, only wiki-fun. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 02:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey there. Let me start by saying that I'm very much aware that I still have unresolved work to do at Honoré de Balzac. I appreciate the comments you left there and I do plan to address those concerns.
However, I've also been very busy on the article about Nigerian novelist Chinua Achebe. It's in a semi-decent shape now, and I wonder if you'd be willing to offer a peer review? I know you're busy, but I would be your best friend forever and ever. Thanks in advance! – Scartol · Talk 00:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Cupie-ten-Cupie! What a beautiful landscape you have on your page! I look out on the steel works, the coal loader, the port and the grain terminal. At least I used to, until my neighbours built their blinking extension! The grain terminal has an enomous row of silos which change colour with the light and, on the very rare rainy day (seven years of drought) a rainbow always arched right over them and disappeared in the port. Well, my jjacarandas are about to do their Novemmber thing and are going to be glorious. In manny places they are planted alternately with Illawarra Flame Trees and make an extraordinary contrast of colour, but my flame tree is covered with leaves, which means it just wont this year..... you realise that I'm writing all this bbecause you obviously take delight in these things.... now what I really wanted to say was "Thank you very much!" and "Congratulations" to you as well, because you obviously had a part in the success of Shakespeare.... the FArticle anyway! (Hey that's quite fuuny... I'm sure Will the Bard would have loved it.) You know the memorial to Shakespeare in Southwark Cathedral... well, my youngest son found chewing gum up Will's left nostril, so every time we are in the UK, he wants to go and see if it's happened again.
You sound like a very useful person to do a little review of the Background sections of Romanesque architecture and Gothic architecture. If you have the time and inclination, could you please take a look. I am going to put them up for FAC. Amandajm 02:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I have nominated the MW articles for a featured topic. Awadewit | talk 11:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your comments. I have replied to your questions and made necessary edits to the article to make it more satisfactory.thanks Dineshkannambadi 01:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I have made more corrections now based on your arguements.thanks. Dineshkannambadi 12:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, qp -- I wonder if you'd be interested in an Anglo-Saxon question that's come up. I received some comments at the Wiglaf of Mercia FAC, which is here, about the terminology. That led me to create a few suggested terminology rules. I've put them here, on a subpage of mine. I thought you might be interested in them: if you have time, let me know what you think -- either edit them, or post a note on that talk page or on my regular talk page. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 16:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to stop commenting now, in case it seems like I'm picking on that article. The trouble is that my particular specialist period at university was 1360–1460 (my thesis was on trade relations between England and Burgundy under Henry V; I nominated the article Jogaila at FA, though I don't usually write articles on my specialist period). This means that I can sense the problem a mile off here. I don't intend to deflate Jacky (though I know that is possible and it makes me nervous). What I really hope is that he/she will take the point and go on to write articles from only the best sources in future. If one does that, even a non-specialist cannot go too far wrong. You mention Wiglaf: now there's a case. Mike is not a specialist, and he makes that clear himself. Yet he knows exactly what good sources are, and by sticking to those (and attending carefully to comments at FAC), he writes superb articles. qp10qp 13:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking. I don't have time for that sort of thing! Curse my natural inclination toward helping others! – Scartol · Talk 18:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Qp10qp. Awadewit referred me to you. I have been working on an article, John Knox, and I was wondering if you could take a look either through a reviewer's or a copyeditor's eyes. I should mention that I cannot match neither yours nor Awadewit's scholarly output or English abilities. But any assistance would be appreciated! -- RelHistBuff 13:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I never review your articles, because they're always perfect :-) But I couldn't resist peeking at Medici, and I'm glad I got to actually make a small addition to the lead of a real Medici !! Now I'm going to go look at RHB's article, after I pout about why he didn't ask me. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
(unindent) Oh dear Sandy, I didn't forget you! I just thought you already had your hands full with FAC, FAR, etc.. Thanks for the tip on the dash script; I'll clean them up after Qp10qp has gone through it. And thanks in advance, Qp10qp. Yes, I guess it's pretty clear my prose skills are not up to par and I really appreciate your help... anything that will keep User:Tony1 from having fits when he sees the article at FAC! :-) As for WP:SIZE, Knox is nearing 60KB. so I assume it will need some reduction like you suggested for Joseph Priestly. -- RelHistBuff 11:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Qp, if you have a minute, could you take a look at the first paragraph in this section of Wiglaf? Awadewit has been reviewing the article at FAC, and is now supporting, but she did suggest that the paragraph describing theories of different sources for Mercian kings in the 820s needs clarification. The relevant discussion is down near the bottom of the FAC nomination. I think she's probably right, but it's one of those cases where I'm too close to the prose and can't really see how to improve it. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 03:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
You said I should suggest articles for you to have a look at, after I looked at Catherine. Well, here are a few suggestions: Serge Voronoff and Astronomische Nachrichten. Not much else, I'm afraid, unless you want to dabble in expanding a very short stub: 1356 Basel earthquake. Any mention of earthquakes in your books? We talked about comets before. Maybe volcanic eruptions? Just some ideas. Carcharoth 18:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
See Talk:Joseph Priestley#British English?. Part the second. Awadewit | talk 02:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
You may find this' fun to peruse over your toast and tea (cappucino and croissant?). The readers' comments are illuminating. -- ROGER DAVIES TALK 11:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 02:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, SandyGeorgia recommended you as somebody who might make a good admin. If you would be interested in being nominated, please drop me a note on my talk page. Tim Vickers 04:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again for the review. I believe I've addressed most of your comments (just researching the others); would you mind striking those comments you feel have been addressed? CloudNine 15:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I finally got around to the comments you made on Honoré de Balzac post-FAC. Sorry it took me so long; I still need to fill in some stuff, but most of the issues have been addressed. Thanks for your fastidious scrutiny. – Scartol · Talk 14:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
A listserv that I subscribe to has recently been having a discussion on good Clare books. Since we might work on that page, I thought I would list them here before I forget:
Because we really need more to read at the moment. :) Awadewit | talk 19:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Please think about adding yourself to this list of peer reviewers. Awadewit | talk 19:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi! You may be interested in this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Edmund the Martyr. DrKiernan 14:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey there PR buddy. Since I reviewed that article on the buildings of Salvestro de' Medici (or whatever it was called), I figure you owe me. How about doing a peer review of Harriet Tubman? – Scartol · Talk 02:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I know you are relieved that it is nearly over, but there is one missing item. Do you have the page number in Marshall concerning her statement on Knox’s return to Geneva (see Talk:John_Knox#Those_Bowes)? By the way, I know Knox was a killjoy, but I have found an interesting item in another biography. It seems in 1571, he took a short break from his post in St Giles and returned to East Lothian. There, he was joined by old friends and took part in a céilidh where he supposedly “moved the crowd to joyous merriment”. Do you think it’s worth including this in the article? With the proper citation, of course. ;-) -- RelHistBuff 08:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
This is an
archive of inactive discussions.
Don't let me distract you from Shakespeare, but I thought you might be interested in seeing where King James has got to now (ie. how much the article has changed). The styles and honours were added very recently, and I wonder what you think of that Gunpowder plot paragraph? Anyway, what I really wanted to share with you is his poem on the Great Comet of 1618. What do you think? Carcharoth 14:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm still in Canada. I notice the application is in progress. Is there anything I need to do? Tom Reedy 22:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I saw the comment. He is a 15-year-old Korean student. You might want to wait for more commnets before you change the reading level too much. Nobody else seems to have a problem with it and it's about as simple as it can get without becoming condescending--about the level of a daily newspaper. Tom Reedy 01:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and I don't really understand how to "sign the nom". Tom Reedy 01:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
We're doing very well in our application. Is this what you anticipated? RedRabbit 01:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I've just finished reviewing the full WS article and I must say I'm impressed with the work you've put in there. Finally venturing off the safe pond of purely personal biographical detail and onto the murky waters of literary critcism, I found the text of those sections were now actually comprehensible to a mere mortal. Outstanding work!-- Xover 21:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I had a look at the "funambulous Frenchman" footnote, but failed to penetrate the meaning of the quote. Since you can't see the poem (which is strange, as it should be accessible), I thought I'd type it out here before I go and read about Shakespeare...
James I of England's poem on the Great Comet of 1618:
Yee men of Brittayne wherefore gaze ye so,
Vpon an angry starre? When as yee knowe
The Sun must turne to darke, the Moone to bloodde,
And then t'will bee to late to turne to good.
O bee so happy then whilst time doth last,
As to remember Doomesday is not past:
And misinterpret not with vayne conceyte
The character you see of Heauen's heighte:
Which though it bringe the Worlde some newes from fate,
The letter is such as none can it translate:
And for to guesse at God Almighties minde
Were such a thinge might cosen all mankinde:
Therefore I wish the curious man to Keepe
His rash imaginations until hee sleepe:
Then let him dreame of famine, plague, and warre;
And think the match with Spayne hath rays'de this starre:
And let him thinke that I theyr Prince, and Mynion
Will shortly change, or which is worse, religion:
And that hee may haue nothing else to feare,
Let him walke Paules and meete the diuell there:
Or if hee bee a Puritane and scapes,
Jesuites salute him in theyr proper shapes:
These Jealousies I would not haue bee treason
For him whose fancy ouer-rules his reason.
But to bee sure hee did no hurte, t'were fitt,
Hee should bee bold to pray for no more witt,
But onely to conceale his dreame: for there
Are they that would believe all hee dares feare.
-Jacobus Rex
Quoted from here, in the Journal of the British Astronomical Association (JBAA) [published in 1987 in volume 97:2]. Carcharoth 00:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
So, can you explain any of the references he makes in the poem? I get the reference to the Spanish Match, but the "walke Paules and meete the diuell there" is a bit opaque for me. Is that a reference to Paul on the road to Damascus, and meeting the devil and changing (or confirming) one's religion? And I'm not 100% certain, but is the bit at the end saying, "I don't mind what religion you are, as long as you conceal it"?? A learned king calming his frightened and superstitious populace while one of the most spectacular comets in history flames overhead? Carcharoth 00:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Anne popped up on my watchlist when you carried out this edit. So I did a Google search for "funambulous Frenchman", and the top two results were Anne and Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Sarah Trimmer. Now I begin to understand more clearly! :-) Anyway, wiktionary does have the required words: wikt:funambulate, wikt:funambulation and wikt:funambulist. Google suggested I wanted "funambulus", which took me full circle back to here. A bit late, but maybe James's language in the poem will be as fertile a source of Jacobean linguistic oddities? Carcharoth 15:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm just passing through, as usual, but I am in awe of your work on the Shakespeare article. I've just made a few small edits which I hope are OK, and the one thing that I wanted to raise is He signed legal documents as "William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon", which I feel needs a ref.
I thought about trying to integrate the Speculation section into the Life, where I (and, I think, you) thought it ought to be, but then I blenched [blench, to turn aside, to turn aside from what is right, to flinch - C J Sisson's glossary in my Complete Works]. If no-one's done it by my bedtime, though, I might have a go.
Best wishes, and keeping my fingers crossed for the FA result, which is looking, uh, hopeful. -- GuillaumeTell 17:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
I read the article in three sittings during the first nom. I read it in one sitting during this week, which is a credit to how far it has come since. Anyway, thats not why I'm here; can I ask that you perform one of your patented forensic dissections on Symphony No. 3 (Górecki). I would really appreciate it, and you need not be gentle, all suggestions or criticisms welcome. Ceoil 18:04, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
And by the way I'm spending my time these days between Poland, Holland, and Ireland, and I followed that FAC at the time, saw the difficulties, and understood that you could not turn to Yeats. Ceoil 18:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of High Culture | |
I commend your hard work on William Shakespeare. Choosing to edit such a high-profile, controversial and research-intensive article is a mark of patience, perseverance and dedication to Wikipedia that is rarely seen. Wikipedia clearly needs more editors such as yourself. RedRabbit 17:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC) |
You deserved another. RedRabbit 17:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I know that you are probably overwhelmed with the Shakespeare FAC right now, but if you get any time in the next week or so, I would urge you to review Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough. It is up for FA and is quite good. The article is worthy of your careful scrutiny. Awadewit | talk 12:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought you might be interested in this article vaguely related to Shakespeare (it is really about the writing of history). Awadewit | talk 09:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Have you, an Englishman, ever heard the idiom "no worries"? I am seeing it posted more frequently on the internet from English and Americans, and I know it is of Austrlian origin. Perhaps this all comes down to Neighbours, a show we export but don't actually watch. RedRabbit 15:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
I am pleased to see that there is someone on FAC besides Yannismarou actually evaluating content; I was beginning to conclude that it had collapsed into the hands of the people inventing rules for the MOS.
Could you have a look at the above article, now in FAC? I would like to have some substantive comments. (I find the paragraphs bunchy myself; but I don't think anything can be done about that until FA is over. If you agree, please say so on the article talk page.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say thanks for the detailed copyedit on Ine of Wessex; I really appreciate it. Mike Christie (talk) 02:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your message, some time back. Do you know about Charles Thomas and his interpretation of an inscribed stone found at Tiltagel, please. If so, please add to the new article on Thomas. Best wishes Vernon White - TALK PAGE 21:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much, both for the valued support, and for the compliments that accompanied it. Both are much appreciated. It's a great pleasure to get you to review one of my articles; I know it'll be work, and I know it'll be worth it. Thank you.
I have replied to your note on geography at my talk page; I wanted to post a note here to make sure you saw my thanks. I should add that I am indeed working on Egbert of Wessex. I don't by any means have it in shape yet, but when I do, would you be interested in giving me feedback prior to FAC? Oh, and on Wimborne, haven't found anything yet -- I'll drop you a note if I do. Mike Christie (talk) 02:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could help me copyedit this article of mine. I know you've seen it before. I wrote most of it months ago when I was less familiar with wikipedia writing style, so it is kind of a mess. I really don't know where to start. I'm trying to get it to GA, for now, so it doesn't have to be perfect, just "good-enough". Anyway, I would appreciate your help, or, if you can direct me to another good copyeditor, that would be great. Thanks, Wrad 04:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi -- I'm working on Egbert of Wessex, and haven't had any luck looking for a ref for the information on Egbert's bones in this paragraph. The editor who added it said they thought they got it from Kings, Queens, Bones & Bastards by David Hilliam. Sutton Publisihing, 1998; I don't have it and there's no preview available on Google Books. I can't find anything else in Google Books that gives the story. Do you happen to have anything that mentions this? It's a nice story, and I would hate to pull out the quote; I'd probably order the book via a library loan first. But if you have something that can source this that would be great.
Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 02:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
If you have time, another question -- Raedburh/Redburga. The article on Egbert currently says "Egbert married Redburga, a Frankish princess (possibly a sister or sister-in-law of the emperor Charlemagne), and had two sons and a daughter." I can't find any mention of her, or the children other than Aethelwulf, in anything I've got or anything that looks reliable on Google Books. I assume this is one of those bits of information that comes solely from a cryptic reference in the Annals of St. Bertin or something like that. Do you have any idea what the source is for this? Mike Christie (talk) 10:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
If you have the time and the inclination, I'd be glad of any additional feedback that occurs to you on Egbert. I've now added everything I've got a source for, removed everything unsourced, and rewritten the lead. I think the organization is now right. The only thing I know is missing is something on the coinage during Egbert's time; I don't have good refs for that stuff but I'm hopeful that Angus will be able to help there, as I see he's been scanning old numismatic pictures into Aldfrith. I've looked for more on Cornish placenames, but I don't have anything to add to what you've already done. I will be working on making the references consistent, and cleaning up any wikilinking problems, and probably a final copyedit. Any input you have time for would be much appreciated. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, could you comment on Thoughts on the Education of Daughters at its FAC? It hasn't drawn a lot of interest, being a conduct book. Awadewit | talk 17:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
You should definitely nominate this article for "Did You Know". I'd be happy to make a 100x100px crop of the portrait to go with it. - PKM 23:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I may have a good library, but you've been to the Uffizi... And I don't have the Yates, so thanks for the pointer.
I'll start it shortly, madness at the office this week, working late, yada yada ... - PKM 17:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Qp10qp, I have fixed the wikEd dashes issue, please see User_talk:Cacycle/wikEd#Dashes. Cacycle 02:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 04:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
well done. I wondered what had gone wrong. AndyJones 12:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your careful attention to detail on Honoré de Balzac. – Scartol · Talk 22:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Your comments would be much appreciated at this discussion regarding the Mary Wollstonecraft featured topic. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 07:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello there. Sorry to bug you, but I'm looking for guidance on a question about an image. I'm currently helping Al Ameer son work on Yasser Arafat, and the article mentions Arafat's appearance on the cover of the Dec. 13, 1968 Time. Can we include this in the article under the fair use rationale? I've never done a fair-use image, so I figured I'd ask someone who is very knowledgeable. Thanks in advance for your help. – Scartol · Talk 21:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I always argued that front page articles should be protected; I am actaully suprised this article has attracted so little vandalism and disruption so far.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I just couldn't stop....Next time I'll know better than to grade and edit simultaneously. Catastrophe. Awadewit | talk 12:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Sad day ... want any? [1] SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
In pages 108-109, of Stefano Ticozzi it distinguishes them and notes that both were Florentines and working at Fountainbleu; it is quite possible that time has created two individuals from one original. All I can go by for now is Ticozzi, sometimes Getty ULAN can clarify. Googlebooks has only digitized the second volume of Michael Bryans dictionary of painters and engravers.. CARAVAGGISTI 04:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, perhaps you could comment on A Vindication of the Rights of Men? It is currently up for FAC here. Thanks. (I see Shakespeare is going to be on the main page - congratulations!?) Awadewit | talk 22:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
You are going rather beyond what Blunt actually says, are you not? Johnbod 01:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I had checked the main text, but not the footnotes, which I have just been doing. Nonetheless, "technical incompetence" needs qualifying - Duvet is a very skilled engraver indeed, or the prints would look like mush. But his figure drawing is not great, and his compositional ideas - clearly wholly deliberate - are very personal. Johnbod 02:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it does sound convincing. Sir Carchlock strikes again! A brilliant discovery about "Walke Pauls", I must say! And there was me trying to be all William Empson about it. What an odd place to go for news, though, a cathedral. Of course, churches were dens of iniquity in those days, now I come to think about it. Pepys used to go to different ones each week according to which woman he wanted to chat up, which he did during the sermon. It was almost the only chance there was to get a respectable lady at your mercy.
Catherine de' Medici was also very interested in comets, I've been finding out. She had this tower (right) built for her astronomers to study the sky from. Looks a bit puny now, doesn't it; but it was quite something in its day. qp10qp 17:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, perhaps you could help us figure out what to delete and what to keep over at the Joseph Priestley peer review. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 22:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
See new addition to Letters Written in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. Do you think the person is trying to help or self-promoting? I left an unfortunate message on their talk page which I tried to rectify. I know you can cite yourself, but... Awadewit | talk 22:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm so sorry I couldn't help you out at Shakespeare. I've been so sick for the past two days. And I still have to teach. You know how that goes. I hope the article will soon be restored to its old self. Awadewit | talk 17:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment, could you respond to Roger? He has taken the AE/BE debate to the MOS pages. I am too sick to deal with that right now. No wiki-stress for me, only wiki-fun. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 02:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey there. Let me start by saying that I'm very much aware that I still have unresolved work to do at Honoré de Balzac. I appreciate the comments you left there and I do plan to address those concerns.
However, I've also been very busy on the article about Nigerian novelist Chinua Achebe. It's in a semi-decent shape now, and I wonder if you'd be willing to offer a peer review? I know you're busy, but I would be your best friend forever and ever. Thanks in advance! – Scartol · Talk 00:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Cupie-ten-Cupie! What a beautiful landscape you have on your page! I look out on the steel works, the coal loader, the port and the grain terminal. At least I used to, until my neighbours built their blinking extension! The grain terminal has an enomous row of silos which change colour with the light and, on the very rare rainy day (seven years of drought) a rainbow always arched right over them and disappeared in the port. Well, my jjacarandas are about to do their Novemmber thing and are going to be glorious. In manny places they are planted alternately with Illawarra Flame Trees and make an extraordinary contrast of colour, but my flame tree is covered with leaves, which means it just wont this year..... you realise that I'm writing all this bbecause you obviously take delight in these things.... now what I really wanted to say was "Thank you very much!" and "Congratulations" to you as well, because you obviously had a part in the success of Shakespeare.... the FArticle anyway! (Hey that's quite fuuny... I'm sure Will the Bard would have loved it.) You know the memorial to Shakespeare in Southwark Cathedral... well, my youngest son found chewing gum up Will's left nostril, so every time we are in the UK, he wants to go and see if it's happened again.
You sound like a very useful person to do a little review of the Background sections of Romanesque architecture and Gothic architecture. If you have the time and inclination, could you please take a look. I am going to put them up for FAC. Amandajm 02:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I have nominated the MW articles for a featured topic. Awadewit | talk 11:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your comments. I have replied to your questions and made necessary edits to the article to make it more satisfactory.thanks Dineshkannambadi 01:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I have made more corrections now based on your arguements.thanks. Dineshkannambadi 12:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, qp -- I wonder if you'd be interested in an Anglo-Saxon question that's come up. I received some comments at the Wiglaf of Mercia FAC, which is here, about the terminology. That led me to create a few suggested terminology rules. I've put them here, on a subpage of mine. I thought you might be interested in them: if you have time, let me know what you think -- either edit them, or post a note on that talk page or on my regular talk page. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 16:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to stop commenting now, in case it seems like I'm picking on that article. The trouble is that my particular specialist period at university was 1360–1460 (my thesis was on trade relations between England and Burgundy under Henry V; I nominated the article Jogaila at FA, though I don't usually write articles on my specialist period). This means that I can sense the problem a mile off here. I don't intend to deflate Jacky (though I know that is possible and it makes me nervous). What I really hope is that he/she will take the point and go on to write articles from only the best sources in future. If one does that, even a non-specialist cannot go too far wrong. You mention Wiglaf: now there's a case. Mike is not a specialist, and he makes that clear himself. Yet he knows exactly what good sources are, and by sticking to those (and attending carefully to comments at FAC), he writes superb articles. qp10qp 13:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking. I don't have time for that sort of thing! Curse my natural inclination toward helping others! – Scartol · Talk 18:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Qp10qp. Awadewit referred me to you. I have been working on an article, John Knox, and I was wondering if you could take a look either through a reviewer's or a copyeditor's eyes. I should mention that I cannot match neither yours nor Awadewit's scholarly output or English abilities. But any assistance would be appreciated! -- RelHistBuff 13:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I never review your articles, because they're always perfect :-) But I couldn't resist peeking at Medici, and I'm glad I got to actually make a small addition to the lead of a real Medici !! Now I'm going to go look at RHB's article, after I pout about why he didn't ask me. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
(unindent) Oh dear Sandy, I didn't forget you! I just thought you already had your hands full with FAC, FAR, etc.. Thanks for the tip on the dash script; I'll clean them up after Qp10qp has gone through it. And thanks in advance, Qp10qp. Yes, I guess it's pretty clear my prose skills are not up to par and I really appreciate your help... anything that will keep User:Tony1 from having fits when he sees the article at FAC! :-) As for WP:SIZE, Knox is nearing 60KB. so I assume it will need some reduction like you suggested for Joseph Priestly. -- RelHistBuff 11:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Qp, if you have a minute, could you take a look at the first paragraph in this section of Wiglaf? Awadewit has been reviewing the article at FAC, and is now supporting, but she did suggest that the paragraph describing theories of different sources for Mercian kings in the 820s needs clarification. The relevant discussion is down near the bottom of the FAC nomination. I think she's probably right, but it's one of those cases where I'm too close to the prose and can't really see how to improve it. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 03:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
You said I should suggest articles for you to have a look at, after I looked at Catherine. Well, here are a few suggestions: Serge Voronoff and Astronomische Nachrichten. Not much else, I'm afraid, unless you want to dabble in expanding a very short stub: 1356 Basel earthquake. Any mention of earthquakes in your books? We talked about comets before. Maybe volcanic eruptions? Just some ideas. Carcharoth 18:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
See Talk:Joseph Priestley#British English?. Part the second. Awadewit | talk 02:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
You may find this' fun to peruse over your toast and tea (cappucino and croissant?). The readers' comments are illuminating. -- ROGER DAVIES TALK 11:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 02:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, SandyGeorgia recommended you as somebody who might make a good admin. If you would be interested in being nominated, please drop me a note on my talk page. Tim Vickers 04:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again for the review. I believe I've addressed most of your comments (just researching the others); would you mind striking those comments you feel have been addressed? CloudNine 15:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I finally got around to the comments you made on Honoré de Balzac post-FAC. Sorry it took me so long; I still need to fill in some stuff, but most of the issues have been addressed. Thanks for your fastidious scrutiny. – Scartol · Talk 14:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
A listserv that I subscribe to has recently been having a discussion on good Clare books. Since we might work on that page, I thought I would list them here before I forget:
Because we really need more to read at the moment. :) Awadewit | talk 19:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Please think about adding yourself to this list of peer reviewers. Awadewit | talk 19:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi! You may be interested in this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Edmund the Martyr. DrKiernan 14:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey there PR buddy. Since I reviewed that article on the buildings of Salvestro de' Medici (or whatever it was called), I figure you owe me. How about doing a peer review of Harriet Tubman? – Scartol · Talk 02:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I know you are relieved that it is nearly over, but there is one missing item. Do you have the page number in Marshall concerning her statement on Knox’s return to Geneva (see Talk:John_Knox#Those_Bowes)? By the way, I know Knox was a killjoy, but I have found an interesting item in another biography. It seems in 1571, he took a short break from his post in St Giles and returned to East Lothian. There, he was joined by old friends and took part in a céilidh where he supposedly “moved the crowd to joyous merriment”. Do you think it’s worth including this in the article? With the proper citation, of course. ;-) -- RelHistBuff 08:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)