The {{ refbegin}} and {{ refend}} templates apply the same formatting as {{ reflist}} to other bibliographies or reference lists, one 'opening' and one 'closing'. The Benjamin Disraeli article was already using both, but with refend placed before refbegin, meaning that refbegin was unclosed and therefore applying the reference-style formatting to the rest of the article (including the succession and navigation boxes). The use of these templates is optional and I just placed the corresponding opening and closing template to those already in use. Their use in this article seemed appropriate given the length of the lists (and their use seemed to be the previous intention), hence why I added the 'missing' templates rather that deleting the existing ones. I hope this helps, matt br 09:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Kenneth MacMillan you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Kenneth MacMillan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Seattle --
Seattle (
talk)
21:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes! I have " We'll Never Have to Say Goodbye Again" open if you would like to review it. Thank you. Seattle ( talk) 04:08, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Running Man Barnstar | |
Thank you for all you have done to help me with the Boat Race articles. Tonight we hit a landmark, over 50% of the race articles are now Good or Featured Articles, which is a monumental achievement considering that none of the articles even existed eight months ago. Thanks again. The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:34, 3 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, Tim. I hope your holidays were pleasant. Today I created a peer review request for the Gary Cooper article that was promoted to GA last month. I spent the past two weeks making additional edits related to GA comments and suggestions. If you have the time, please review the article and leave any feedback at the peer review page in preparation for FAC nomination. Also, can you recommend any other experienced editors who might be interested in participating in this peer review? Regards, Bede735 ( talk) 02:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
To my embarrassment, English is my first language and I have never encountered that phrase before, at least not knowingly. Is it more commonly known in the UK than the US, perhaps? At any rate, I still dislike it and hold that the English Wikipedia is not the best place for it, as I think it would more often than not confuse people for whom English is not their first language. I won't press the matter further though, since it has no real bearing on the article, and I don't know if anyone else has expressed confusion over it. Thanks for enlightening me! Cyrenaic ( talk) 02:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello! I apologize for contacting you out of the blue with a request, but Ms. Gerda Arendt directed me here in response to a question I asked regarding a journal hosted online by ' Project MUSE.' Do you happen to know any editors here who might be members? Specifically, I'm looking for the information in this journal. As far as I can tell, it is only viewable to members of certain institutions. Thank you in advance for your time, and I hope the new year has found you well.- RHM22 ( talk) 15:56, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the text down to a little over 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank ( push to talk) 02:25, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
|
This is to inform you that Ralph Richardson , which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 28 January 2015. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. Have you ever tried the safari browser and the reader function?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
...we'll pass the Capstans round. I'm off on my travels tomorrow, but I've managed to get my story of nautical shenanagins, aka Girl Pat (1935 trawler) to peer review. I'd be most happy if you (and any other willing and faithful soul} would look at it and comment while I'm away. Obviously I won't be able to respond immediately, but it will give me something to look forward to when I get back on 26th. I hope all is well with you. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:27, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Congratulations on our Erasmus Prize! [1] -- Ssilvers ( talk) 19:56, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Why, please, did you revert my minor wording change in Benjamin Disraeli? ... Never mind; I just saw your comment in the wikicode. I understand. This British usage is new to me. -- Thnidu ( talk) 08:53, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I've just laid this article on peer review. It is easy reading, about a pleasant, unobjectionable character well beloved in American History ... oh wait, that's the other guy. Sorry. Would appreciate your comments, though.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 23:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hensley Henson you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ealdgyth --
Ealdgyth (
talk)
16:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Hensley Henson you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Hensley Henson for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ealdgyth --
Ealdgyth (
talk)
17:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I am a bit stuck on Hermeneutic style. An expert has promised to look at it, but at present he does not have time. If he does, I will no doubt make major amendments, so it seems premature to take it to PR. However, I came across an article I created years ago about an eccentric theory concerning the Ancestry of the Godwins, which seemed possible FA material, so I have put some work in improving it and taken it to PR at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ancestry of the Godwins/archive1. Your critical eye would be most welcome. Dudley Miles ( talk) 20:29, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Hensley Henson you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Hensley Henson for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ealdgyth --
Ealdgyth (
talk)
14:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, I think that setting back the edit of Rose Leclercq has the feel of you saying "this is mine and I like it this way". Am I wrong to take that view? I would have expected some explanation. I was hoping to do some work on this family, but I have just gone off the idea. Can you explain yourself? Victuallers ( talk) 16:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Your name has been invoked here, and I'm invoking it too, hopefully not in vain. Your opinion? Agreed that "the musicologist" might not be the best attribution. My position is that, per guidelines, policy (at WP:SUBSTANTIATE) and general experience with history articles, mentioning someone without at least suggesting what their connection is doesn't work. I can see that if you've got a sophisticated readership and an article that's focused on music criticism, there's an argument that they'll get what you're saying without attribution ... but we're talking about the Main Page viewership here. (And btw, that sentence has been a pain from day one. Dropping it is an option.) - Dank ( push to talk) 14:21, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Next person, this time from your table James Bates, sad, I will start, feel free to add, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
and TFA today, RR, precious again, says infobox aficionado and emotionalobserver -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:47, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say thanks for reviewing Mortimer Wheeler; it is much appreciated! Best, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 11:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Would you mind briefly revisiting the peer review, to comment on an issue raised by SchroCat concerning the most appropriate title for this article? I'd be most obliged for your wisdom. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Good evening. Many thanks for your valuable input into the peer review. The article is now at FAC. All further comments and input will be much appreciated, cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your recent thoughts and comments at the informal PR for Casino Royale (novel): The changes you suggested have been taken on board and implemented, and the article is much, much stronger than it was before. As such, I've gone ahead and opened the FAC, and I hope you will have time to have another look through at some point in the future. Thanks again. – SchroCat ( talk) 12:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I have consigned my little song of the sea to the tender mercies of WP:FAC, so any further comments or observations can be made there. Thanks for your interest and encouragement. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
If I may ask a further favor, Horace Greeley is lagging rather at FAC. If you have a spare moment, could you look in? I assure you that Greeley held the highest principles and was second to none in his regard for those of other races. Really.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 01:16, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I have put this article up for peer review again, since it failed FAC. Please have look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Shah Rukh Khan/archive2, and comment if there is any reason that it would not gain your support next time. Thanks, BollyJeff | talk 15:15, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim Riley, since after your review of Neferhotep I you proposed that I ping you in case I have another GAN, I am writing you to let you know that I have put up a new GAN article: Shepseskare. It would be my pleasure if you were interested in reviewing it. Iry-Hor ( talk) 22:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you again for your time and feedback during the GA and PR reviews of the Gary Cooper article. Throwing caution to the wind, I nominated the article as a featured article candidate. I would very much appreciate one last review and assessment when you have the time. By the way, I read the Olivier article, and I think you and SchroCat did an excellent job—a subject worthy of the effort. Regards, Bede735 ( talk) 14:36, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I have taken Hermeneutic style to Wikipedia:Peer review/Hermeneutic style/archive1. Your critical eye over it gratefully received. Dudley Miles ( talk) 15:12, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I happened upon the topic of eccentric dancing recently and have given this a push forward today. This seems to be mainly music hall/vaudeville but I see some jazz ballet described in this way too. It's an awkward topic because it is, by definition, unconventional and idiosyncratic. Perhaps you can help, if it pleases you ... Andrew D. ( talk) 16:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! This is to let you know that I have put up Shepseskare as FAC, see here. Iry-Hor ( talk) 18:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Tim. Thank you very much for your revision on Serralves. Far from discouraging me, your comments cast some light I needed to go on contributing to improve the article in the right direction. I was very naïf and certainly needed some guidance like yours. I really appreciate your help. When improved, I will submit the article for your peer review, if you please. Thank you very much indeed. Caravasar | talk — Preceding undated comment added 17:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
|
I have opened the peer review for the film. Please do suggest any changes that I should make before I go for FAC. — Ssven2 speak 2 me 04:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
In your 3rd comment about the "in order to" sentence, can you specify which sections have that sentence so that I can change them?
—
Ssven2
speak 2 me
07:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For all the excellent work you did on Larry Oliver! Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 22:30, 14 February 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Actors and Filmmakers Award of Excellence |
For your work in promoting one of the goliaths of the acting world, Sir Laurence Olivier to Featured Article status. A mighty achievement to be proud of! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC) |
Royal opera
Thank you for the London opera, another great article with dedication to details about the people behind an institution, - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
Three years ago, you were the twentieth recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Half Barnstar | |
To you for bringing Laurence Olivier to FA status. The other one's for Schrocat.
![]() |
Dear Tim, Yet another request for PR help, I'm afraid, although this one comes with an ready-made opportunity for a pun or two while comparing the subject matter to the content and prose! It concerns the Great Stink, a relatively brief event in London history that has had a beneficial effect that we all enjoy to this day. The PR can be found here, if you have the time to spare. If you don't, no worries! Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 23:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi! First of all many congratulations on Laurence Olivier for getting it to FA status! May I invite you to review Kareena Kapoor Khan filmography and comment at its FLC. If this message is annoying you, feel free to remove or ignore this message. -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 18:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. Does the article need more work before its day on the Main Page? I had to squeeze the summary down to around 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank ( push to talk) 00:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Oops. The character count on this one is 1296, but Bench recently said that that might be causing problems at ITN. I'm not sure about this, but I've agreed to keep it at no more than 1250 for now. Can you find 46 characters to cut? - Dank ( push to talk) 19:01, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I have now added a couple of images to make it more visually appealing and nominated for FAC. Thanks. Dudley Miles ( talk) 20:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry to be so slow about completing my review of your fine musical article, which I shall finish shortly. Could I ask you to revisit the Tillman FAC? A reviewer has expressed certain concerns.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 00:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Aver good afteroon to you! Many thanks for your help on the Great Stink. The article is now at FAC for further consideration, should you wish to partake further. Many thanks! - SchroCat ( talk) 16:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Bramshill House passed FAC, thankyou for your input. I've opened a peer review for William Burges's The Tower House. Comments will be most welcome. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Yet more claims on your time: the Ghost Ship awaits comments at PR. I'd be very glad if you'd visit. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim, thank you for the expeditious GA review and the very kind words. I have started a peer review for Oom Paul here and look forward to hearing the quibbles you mentioned if/when you find the time. Cheers and I hope you are well. — Cliftonian (talk) 12:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thought this might interest you as a Coward buff I believe. It's still in rough stages of development.. Do you have anything in your books to verify what is written and anything further? I'd guess it went beyond the 1930s..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Any luck with finding content on the Ritz? Good to see BTW that at least some editors are respectful [2]. I wasn't aware of the Porter article, should be taken to FAC at some point.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
I have opened the FAC for
Enthiran. Feel free to leave comments.
—
Ssven2
Speak 2 me
14:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello! We haven't met, but I noticed that you are a respected and active reviewer and writer of high-quality content. I wondered if you might be interested in helping me with an article I wrote that is now at peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Irataba/archive1. It's about a Mohave Chief who was quite an interesting character. The FAC was recently closed due to issues with the prose, but since I am about the only person who has edited the page it's getting more difficult for me to find and resolve problems. I'd be appreciative if you took a look, but I understand if you are too busy or uninterested. Thanks! Rationalobserver ( talk) 20:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Atttention talk page stalkers. It's not quite perfect but if you copy the contents of this into your User:Tim riley/common.css and save you should be able to hide the infoboxes in most biographies with just a photo in place. I've not yet solved the issue of how to rid of the box outline around it, but on my own screen hiding the silly trivia and redundant content in them is a considerable improvement. Obviously this won't change our outlook on the enforcement of infoboxes in articles we've got to FA and the wider issue of them often making wikipedia look less professional and trivial, but at least in our own eyes it is better to not see them in biographies. If you could all give it a try in your User@xxx/common.css see if it is an improvement. Hope this helps.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:09, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
SchroCat Give it a try and look at Peter Sellers, no identibox!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello there! Could I trouble you with your opinion in a notability matter? Thank you, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 13:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Mary Celeste is now at FAC. Please look if you have time. Brianboulton ( talk) 00:10, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
|
Hello, Mr. RileyTim. I'm sorry to bother you with a(nother) request, but I wonder if you could please take a look at
the FAC for
1804 dollar, if you don't find the subject matter too dull. It seems to have gotten little interest since I nominated it. I know that reviews aren't strictly QPQ, but please do feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have something that needs reviewing.-
RHM22 (
talk)
05:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar |
Today's featured article,
Hugh Walpole, was a fascinating read. Thank you so much.
![]() |
Thankyou for your input into the peer review. The article is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim—this is just a note to let you know that Uncle Paul is now at FAC here. Hope you're well, cheers for all your help thus far. — Cliftonian (talk) 13:10, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello, this is to let you know that Unas (another 5th Dynasty Egyptian pharaoh) is now a GA candidate (and hopefully next onto FAC). I would be most grateful if you accepted to review it, or otherwise, if you could point another user to me for a possible review. This would greatly shorten the (usually) very long wait between GA nomination and review. Note this article received around 40,000 visits/year. Iry-Hor ( talk) 14:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Excuse Mr. Riley,
I have been working on the Stephen Sondheim page for some years now, and I would truly love some input on how to improve the page. (we corresponded about four years ago on a peer review for this page). I would love to get pictures on the page, and the pages that are featured/good articles all have a great array of photos. I would truly appreciate some, or any help in this matter.
Thank You Phaeton23 ( talk) 16:15, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Tim! I cannot thank you enough for the input! If you could pass the word to your Sondheimian friends, that be greatly appreciated! Thanks a million Tim! Phaeton23 ( talk) 16:39, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Last year you kindly contributed to the above article's peer review or or FAC or both. An issue has arisen from yesterday's TFA appearance, and is under discussion on the article's talk. Briefly: an editor added into the text the cited information that Bondfield's was privately known as "Maggie", and then incorporated this into the lead so the subject appeared as Margaret Grace ("Maggie") Bondfield. I have removed the nickname from the lead, and stated my position on the talkpage. I would be pleased if you could visit and briefly comment there. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Wikimedia UK Barnstar | |
Dear Tim, thanks for running that editathon yesterday . | ||
this WikiAward was given to Tim riley by Were SpielChequers on 16:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC) for contributions to the UK chapter |
Wasn't there something to do with Charlie Chaplin at the event Tim?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jenna Roberts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cinderella (ballet). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
.
Hi Tim,
I hope 2015 has been going well for you. I have started a new FAC here for an article called Mind Meld. Considering that I have appreciated your input into my previous FACs, I thought that I would ask if you have time to participate in this one. I would be glad for any constructive comments you are willing to provide.
Neelix ( talk) 14:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Re 'His first novel to achieve real success was his third...'. I note that you reverted my substitution of 'commercial' for 'real', which is not an encyclopedic word, and not a very meaningful one in any context. Valetude ( talk) 14:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for Onegin, - I wonder if you could start a stub on Cranko's Turn of the Shrew, to fit in here? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
ps: while that should be soon, a long-term plan is GA for Fauré's Requiem, by November, hopefully with you? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Tim, You were kind enough to comment at PR and FAC on Casino Royale; could I ask for a similar favour for the next instalment of the Bond series: Live and Let Die, which is now at PR? Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 11:58, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Thankyou for your input at the peer review. Irataba is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate that you won't defend doing it. AgnosticAphid talk 22:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim; hope that you are well. Upon completion of the Mortimer Wheeler GAN, you requested that I let you know as and when I sent the article to Peer Review and/or FAC. Well, I've now done the former, and you can access it here: Wikipedia:Peer review/Mortimer Wheeler/archive1. No pressure to actually undertake any reviewing unless you feel the desire to, but I thought that I'd let you know. Best for now, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:48, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your thoughts on Live and Let Die at the recent peer review. The article is now at FAC for wider consideration should you wish to comment further. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I am speaking of Tristis est anima mea (attributed to Kuhnau), not my mood. "Stay calm and factual", I tell myself, quoting myself from 2013. Far be it from me to use words Jesus spoke, but ... - Question is if you might find further sources for the music section, or how I would source observations to the score. We will sing it on Friday. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Look: Georgette Tsinguirides, on the job for 70 years with the same employer Stuttgart Ballet! I have a FAC open, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:27, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
A note to anyone kind enough to watch this page that I have put Ravel's article up for peer review, where all comments will be gratefully received. Tim riley talk 17:40, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
And still the Tower House hasn't passed.. It feels like this particular FAC has been open 3 months for some reason! Happy Easter BTW!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Aymatth started Pierre-Joseph Ravel upon request, not sure if you really care but still..♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for the review Tim. Dudley Miles ( talk) 11:41, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey there, I have began to improve the article according to your review, but I somehow don't know how to flesh ref 12 out cos it's in German. :( That's all that I need help on. Thanks for the review btw. :) Vincent60030 ( talk) 14:05, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Tim, Thanks very much for this. Hopefully we'll have better luck than we did with R3! Take your time... I don't hold out much hope for it first time around to be honest. Cheers! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 13:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim. Thank you for reviewing the article and for your suggested improvements. I had made some alterations to the article and I believe that I have addressed all of your qualms. Hopefully everything is in order. Thanks, Kyriakos ( talk) 15:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I'd be very grateful if you could give Castell Coch a read and comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Castell Coch/archive1. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:08, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I have opened the second FAC for the article. Please do let me know if you would like to make any comments. Thanks. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 02:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
|
...for any headaches I may have caused. It looks like Maunus has unwatchlisted English language and disassociated himself from the article. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
our joint effort, Hallelujah, in fond memory, - I decorated my pages with Hallelujah, despised and rejected, to mark the occasion. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I have been fairly preoccupied recently, but betweentimes have managed to get Jarrow March into a reviewable state, and it awaits attention at peer review. You will notice that your grandfather played a leading role in the march, and that your spiritual grandfather (H. Henson) thought they were all a bunch of dirty commies. I'd be very pleased if you could look it over and make such observations as you think fitting. Brianboulton ( talk) 18:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Running Man Barnstar | |
Hey Tim, just a quick barnstar to say thanks for the many reviews of Boat Race articles you've conducted over the past year. As of this morning, I completed my (initial) goal of ensuing that every Boat Race had, not only its own article, but one that was either of GA or FA status: we now have 158 GAs and 3 FAs that we can all be proud of! It doesn't stop here, for me at least, I'm going to keep up with improving the quality of the GAs and look for more FA opportunities. Plus, there's the small matter of 70 Women's Boat Race articles to get up and running! But thanks again, I couldn't have done it without your help. The Rambling Man ( talk) 15:39, 16 April 2015 (UTC) |
Tim, a brief note to thank your again for your peer review of the above and to let you know it is now at FAC where, again, your comments would be very much appreciated. Best regards. KJP1 ( talk) 17:16, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Tim - really grateful for your support. Now, a big favour. We're having a debate about Burges's death from "a chill". The consensus is we need a footnote. The bottom line appears to be that the Victorians used "chill" or "fever" for a range of illnesses that they didn't fully understand. Prince Albert was said to have caught a "severe chill" which Jenner later (mis?)diagnosed as typhoid. Cholera and influenza were others. Any ideas where I might find an authoritative source for the Victorians use of "chill" as a portmanteau term? Not my area at all. As an aside, I wonder if we could work The Importance of Being Earnest into the footnote:
Really appreciate any advice. KJP1 ( talk) 18:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Tim, I vaguely remember that you had ideas about replacement of the refs to reviews in Gramophone. I am interest in referencing the 1978 La clemenza di Tito recording with Marga Schiml. Btw, I forgot about "our" ballet which made it too late for the 50 years anniversary, but the dancer is in prep for her birthday tomorrow, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Sunday thanks, and did you see how smiled mentioning DFD? - Today the Stuttgart Ballet again: DYK ... that Georgette Tsinguirides, employed by the Stuttgart Ballet for 70 years, was the first choreologist in Germany and has taught ballets by Cranko and MacMillan to generations of dancers? - 70 years! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
To anyone kind enough to watch this page: I have put Ravel up for FAC, where all contributions will be most gladly received. Tim riley talk 16:59, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
That's so kind of all of you, and I am much touched. I really enjoyed writing about Ravel, though I am looking forward to equal enjoyment in my next (joint) FAC project, P G Wodehouse, who is still lurking in a sandbox at present. He lived longer and wrote more than Ravel did, so he may prove a mightier task. Tim riley talk 15:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim, sorry to bother you but does this ring any bells with you? I am wondering if it is someone returning who has form in this field, but I cannot remember any specific examples. So far, only one edit, but if they are some kind of self-appointed Classical Music Delinking Expert™ it could become tedious. If this has no sense of familiarity for you, please don't worry, and apologies for wasting your time. Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 17:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
I have now nominated the Jarrow March at FAC. Any further thoughts, comments etc would be much welcomed. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. This is to inform you that Shah Rukh Khan is now up for FAC again at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Shah Rukh Khan/archive2. You said that I could ping you when this occurred. BollyJeff | talk 12:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Happy to inform you that the article has been promoted. Thank you for your support, Tim. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 13:24, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I say! Thank you very much. A good job I'm not Belgian. Tim riley talk 19:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Thankfully I am, born and bred in Bruges ;-) I have some carrots to give the pony if he gets hungry!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I note your request for citations. You may be aware that the current page is a much edited-down version of the previous page. Perhaps whoever supplied that lengthy material might be the one to approach for sources. Valetude ( talk) 15:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
As you have kindly added comments to one or more of the FLC nominations of Scheduled monuments in Somerset I wanted to let you know that the final list, List of scheduled monuments in Mendip, is nomination for Featured List status at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of scheduled monuments in Mendip/archive1. If you had any comments that would be great.— Rod talk 20:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, I have recently been working on the Burning of Parliament, which is now at PR for comment. Any input you could have would be much appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 20:01, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
![]() | On 2 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Onegin (Cranko), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Onegin (Cranko). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Harrias talk 09:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Remembering fondly your collection for Marga Schiml, it's now in Main space, but under construction, - comments welcome for {{ classical discography row}}, a baby, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I changed BWV 22 recordings to the more compact format and would appreciate your eyes on it and comments before moving ahead, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:33, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
See Barra etc [3] -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:15, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
I've addressed most of the issues raised. Asked for help on OCLCs and will need to dig amongst my book collection for a definition of secondary railway. Mjroots ( talk) 19:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
|
To any fellow editors who may watch this page: I have nominated Verdi's Falstaff for FAC. The nomination is my tribute to the late John Webber, who edited as Viva-Verdi, with whom I worked extensively on the article. I hope I can do him justice. All comments gratefully received. Tim riley talk 14:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Irataba is back at FAC: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Irataba/archive3. We look forward to your comments there. RO (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Slim pickings, I'm afraid, from my shelves. There are two references to her in Freedom's Cause: Lives of the Suffragettes by Fran Abrams (Profile Books, London 2003, ISBN 9781861974259), both in the chapter on Emily Davison. Page 164 mentions Yates as an associate of Davison's from the Royal Holloway College; p. 173 says that Yates was among those who kept vigil at Davison's bedside after the latter's unfortunate encounter with the king's horse. Not much to get your teeth in there. But there is a very informative essay on the old girl in The Women's Suffrage Movement: A Reference Guide 1866-1928, and that's online, here. Just about all you really need to know. I'll keep an eye open for anything more. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I see you've very quickly picked up Carl Nielsen. I'm honoured to see we have such an expert on the job. As you will see, there's been quite a bit of work on the article since we were first in touch. Straightening out the referencing has been a major task but I think everything is more or less in order now. Perhaps you could alert me when you start commenting. I may be able to help out with the follow-up.-- Ipigott ( talk) 14:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Delightful! Let me know if and when I can be of any use reviewing Ms Wulf's article. Tim riley talk 07:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Re: filling out the music section: there are some possibly useful comments in Roger Parker's essay in Grove Music Online, here. Also, I remember there's quite a lot about Falstaff in Charles Osborne's Complete Operas of Verdi; unfortunately I've lost my copy of that book but I reckon it's fairly accessible. I'm looking through my books to see it there's anything else of substance. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:26, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim, how are you? I hope you're doing well. Brian and I have just finished drafting a new article on the Mutiny on the Bounty and now have it at peer review here. Any contributions you might care to make would as always be more than welcome. — Cliftonian (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Does this mean it is incorrect to use "Infobox:Person", summarizing key census data up front, for historical figures? Jmg38 ( talk) 17:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Tim riley: it occured to me that you might be a really good fit for the Wikipedia Library's account coordination volunteer team, because you have been a really strong contributor and really good at interacting with other users! Account coordination only requires a limited amount of time (a few hours a week at peak time), helping screen and approved editors for one (or two) of our donations at WP:TWL/Journals. Its a relatively limited amount of time per month. Would you be interested? Check out our application at Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Coordinators/Signup, Sadads ( talk) 23:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Just in case you didn't get the ping. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 10:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
I would like to thank you, Tim, for the excellent suggestions you made for further work on Carl Nielsen which has just been promoted to FA in time for the 150th anniversary on 9 June. On the strength of this success, I intend to work on the Jean Sibelius article in time for his 150th anniversary on 8 December. The article needs more work than Nielsen did when you stepped in but we also have more time. Let me know if you are interested.-- Ipigott ( talk) 15:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I would like to thank SchroCat the same but do not feel welcome, - please share ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
To anyone who is kind enough to watch this here talk page: SchroCat and I have been overhauling the article on Wodehouse, and have put it up for peer review. All contributions gratefully received, Tim riley talk 12:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
|
I've laid Warren G. Harding at peer review. Your views welcome. I've laboured long to bear a long article, I'm afraid, but when you have a tempest in a Teapot ...-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Could you take a peek at the first line and tell me if "catalog number" turns your stomach? - Dank ( push to talk) 15:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your swift review of Borders Railway! RGloucester — ☎ 19:40, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
While I bask momentarily in the afterglow of the Mutiny before returning to the travails of Jeremy (too long by 1500), would you mind doing a brief talkpage review for The Ordeal of Gilbert Pinfold? I don't want a formal peer review if I can help it, but I'd be glad of your opinion along with those of a few others. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. Based on your participation at Verdi's Falstaff, I thought you might consider working on Don Carlos with the idea of getting the opera promoted in time to appear on the main page for the opera's 150th anniversary on March 11, 2017. I know that's a ways away, but since you tend to be busy I thought I would throw out the idea now. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 23:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim,
Might you have the time to give the JC's Girls article a look-over? I have the article up for an FAC here, and I would be grateful for any comments you might provide in the discussion.
Neelix ( talk) 01:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I have Æthelwulf at peer review and should be most grateful for your advice. I am a bit worried that this one is somewhat turgid, and hopefully you can suggest how to make it more readable. Dudley Miles ( talk) 17:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I have sent Pinfold to WP:FAC on the basis of the talkpage comments to which you kindly contributed. I have been saving my peer review slot for the much more substantial Jeremy Thorpe. The PR is now open, and your comments there will be much appreciated. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Re my deleted edit, you might think of a better word than 'deface' for a perfectly legit addition, suitably referenced. There are wiki vandals about, but I am not one of them. (I do note, however, that Featured Articles merit special treatment.) Valetude ( talk) 14:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
How's that? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 06:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I read your GA review on BWV 243a with much interest. A point you write about is the italicisation and/or enclosing in quotes of Magnificat, "Magnificat anima mea", "Esurientes" etc. You refer to the MoS, in part to MOS:QUOTETITLE. However that same page also contains the following (in the section Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Neither):
Works named by a generic title: Symphony No. 2 by Gustav Mahler ..., Shakespeare's Sonnet 130 ..., The Magnificat by Schütz, ... the Adagio sometimes attributed to Albinoni.
That extends to movements of compositions: e.g. "The first movement of BWV 1047 has no tempo indication, the second and third are an Andante and an Allegro assai. Not: ... an "Andante" and an "Allegro assai" – and even less: ... an Andante and an Allegro assai. Similarly, not "Esurientes", nor Esurientes, but Esurientes, not even when a full title of a movement is used: Magnificat anima mea, not "Magnificat anima mea", nor Magnificat anima mea.
When referring to words that are sung (not to the movement of the composition, i.e. not referring to a title of a composition nor to one of its constituent parts), italicize foreign words would apply per MOS:FOREIGN, e.g. "The ritornello introduces a motif moving up, later sung on Esurientes implevit bonis." (but that is unrelated to style guides on titles). -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 11:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, After a recent re-write, the Hitler Diaries are now at peer review, should you have the time and inclination. Any and all thoughts on the article are most welcome. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 11:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for your comments at the Chetro Ketl peer review. The article is now a featured article candidate, and I'd like to invite you to comment there. Thanks! RO (talk) 17:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad to see you're back, and I look forward to your comments at the Chetro Ketl FAC. RO (talk) 15:26, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, just a note to let you know as a participant in the peer review that Sir Hugh is now at FAC here. Thanks for all your help earlier and I hope you're enjoying your holiday. Cheers, — Cliftonian (talk) 06:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
|
The Oceanides, I found that article - author's first, act of love - and nominated it for DYK, - it graces the Main page right now. I think it has GA potential and will tell the author tomorrow how to nominate, - if you would be inclined to review in your kind way, that would make life easier for the user who mentioned discouragement today. - Different topic: You can now say: Kathleen Ferrier recorded Bach's Mass in B minor with George Enescu. Work in progress, comments welcome, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Returning from a concert, music for the soul, Choir of King's College, Cambridge, conducted by Stephen Cleobury, singing all-English composers, Tye, Gibbons, Byrd, Hacomplaynt, after intermission Vaughan Williams, Harvey, Howells and BB, theme of A Boy was Born, - very pleasing to see that spelling which unfortunately still contradicts this house's rules, - the singing boys were very impressive! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim Riley, I was wondering he you might consider reviewing yet another article on a pharaoh: Menkauhor Kaiu? This article is part of the series I am building up concerning the 5th Dynasty and which, thanks in no small part to your work, already comprises Unas, Shepseskare (both FA), Sahure and Pyramid of Unas (GA). I hope that Menkauhor will make it to FA, in particular since I have received the help of a professional Egyptologist for this article. Iry-Hor ( talk) 11:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your excellent comments on the recent Hitler Diaries PR; the article has now moved on to FAC, should you wish to comment further. Thanks again – SchroCat ( talk) 11:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your comments at the recent peer review (and also its GA review back in 2012). Bentworth is now a featured article candidate, and it would be great if you could comment there. Thanks! JAG UAR 20:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
To anyone who is kind enough to watch this page, may I mention a second-time-round FAC that languished at first attempt for lack of visitors: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hastings Line/archive2. I have commented there, and I think comments from others will be welcomed. Tim riley talk 20:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Anyone who is quixotic enough to dip into this page may be interested – as I am – in the peer review of this pharaoh. I, of course, have been sitting on a canopic jar full of lungs for 4,000 years, but even so Menkauhor Kaiu is before my time, so all help will be welcome. Tim riley talk 18:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'd really appreciate your thoughts here. I'm trying to figure out what to doo going forwards. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 01:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
This is to advise peer reviewers of the above article that I have now nominated it at FAC, and will welcome any further comments. Brianboulton ( talk) 20:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
ITN: As soon as Isolde finished "Mild und leise" I had her article started ;) - More for you: Vaughan Williams, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I did find... some Nabucco images...
I can't help but feel it has the æsthetics of a Vegas stage show, though. Any thoughts on the Il trovatore images? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 00:24, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
File:Frédéric Lix - Auguste Trichon - Giuseppe Verdi's Macbeth (1865 revision) - Original.jpg says it's Act I, Scene 2. But, at the same time, the BNF have set designs for Act II, Scene 5, and Act II Scene 6.
Did the French version fail because the performance got hacked to pieces and rearranged? Because this is pretty clearly Act II, Scene 3 in the standard form. There's Banquo's ghost and everything, unless I'm forgetting something about the end of Act I and Duncan's ghost appears where Banquo will be later or something. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 09:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I wondered if you or a page stalker would be interested in getting Frank Sinatra up to FA in time for his centenary on December 12? I know We hope potentially might be but she's left wikipedia sadly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Any chance of you looking at my latest Indian cinema FAC? It just reached the older nominations marking point. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge/archive1. BollyJeff | talk 21:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim - there are a number of reasons why 'unprecedented' should be removed:
More specifically in this case with 'nearly unprecedented' - the additional word 'nearly' is adding on a layer of unnecessary jargon. An encyclopedic article should focus on facts (quantifiable, qualitative, etc). Stating that something is nearly unprecedented is like saying it is almost amazing, trying to make more out of something than really is there.
The best use of 'unprecedented' would be a situation that causes precedence. So we have to consider the root of the word... Precedence means that something LIKE that has never happened before - so much so that this incident is used as a model for things to come, a new law or set of rules/guidelines is created to deal with the situation next time, etc.
In most cases, simply using 'unprecedented' when discussing something containing a numerical value (sports record, streak of consecutive dates, large salaries or sports player contract values, etc) is an improper use of the word (see #1 - #3 above). It could be re-written to say that this streak is perhaps second only to [xxxx]... but the onus for that would be on the original author making such a claim.
It's best just to state facts and move on. Entirelybs ( talk) 20:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I have divined that you gentlemen are talking about the Arthur Sullivan article. While it's true that the run was "nearly unprecedented", as only one other show had ever run longer, I've added more specific information. What do you think of it, Tim? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 02:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
What ho, and all that. I'm being a pest on the Bond front again, with book three of the series, Moonraker, which is now at PR, should you have either the time or inclination to visit. Many thanks and pip pip. – SchroCat ( talk) 22:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Tim, for all your constructive comments during the review. We now have an article which looks to me as if it is a candidate for FA. And as you will have noticed, with Sgvrfjs we have a highly competent and cooperative editor to take it further down the line. What do you think? We are still hoping to have the main Sibelius article at FA or at least GA by S's 150th anniversary on 8 December but in the meantime it would be good to have an article relating to Sibelius on the front page. Any further advice you may have would be greatly appreciated.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. If you can look at List of Local Nature Reserves in Hertfordshire at FLC I should be most grateful. Dudley Miles ( talk) 18:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, any chance you could review this one for GA? Ritchie and We hope may have some further things to add but I think it's decent for GA now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
That 150th birthday is on 10 August, - a bit of attention there would be nice, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Master Ritchie has now finished. Look forward to further comments if there's any!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:07, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim Riley, this is to let you know, as you requested, that the article on Menkauhor Kaiu is now at FAC, see here. Iry-Hor ( talk) 11:50, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim,
Thank you very much for your review of the JC's Girls article during its FAC. The article has been promoted to featured status and I have nominated it to go up on the main page here. I have also started a FAC for the " Sisters at Heart" article here. If you have time to contribute to the discussion, your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 14:24, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Tim, can you take a look at Kill 'Em All, which I nominated for FA a couple of months ago? It desparately needs reviewers, and since you've been doing FAs for quite some time, thought to give you a call. The nomination is here, and any input will be much appreciated. Have a nice day.-- Retrohead ( talk) 19:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Your way on the Faure thing is the wrong way, but it's not worth trying to convice you over. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:34, August 5, 2015 (UTC)
In undoing my edit to P. G. Wodehouse you claimed "The Church's own website calls it "St Nicholas" with no possessive. The WP article is wrong" Which website would that be? That the church in Guildford is dedicated to Saint Nicolas (NOT Nicholas) is confirmed by the current church website - https://saintnics.com/ and the former one - https://www.stnicolas-guildford.org.uk St Nicolas is confirmed by A Church Near You; St Nicolas, Guildford - http://www.achurchnearyou.com/guildford-st-nicolas/ by the Facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/saintnicolasguildford and the linked school, St Nicolas CofE Aided Infant School, Guildford - https://www.st-nicolas-guildford.com/ You can even read the signage on the image used on the church's Wikipedia page - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/St_Nicholas%27_Church%2C_Bury_Street%2C_Guildford_%28April_2014%2C_from_Northwest%29_%281%29.JP I accept that the listing text does use Nicholas but that is often in error. The weight of evidence clearly backs Nicolas. Nedrutland ( talk) 14:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I looked in at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/J. Gordon Edwards filmography/archive2, and I think anyone kind enough to watch my talk page may also enjoy dipping in. Tim riley talk 21:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your PR and FAC comments and/or edits to Chetro Ketl, which is now a featured article. It was a long and interesting process, but thanks to a wealth of insights and suggestions the article is now among our best. Thanks for taking time out of your busy editing schedule to help me. RO (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
|
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Tear, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Tomlinson and Royal Opera. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim! The above list is currently at FLC here. Can you review it? -- Frankie talk 17:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim, it's been quite a while. How are things going?
The article on the first talking picture in
Tamil,
Kaildas (1931) is at FAC and is nominated by
Kailash29792, who was also the co-nominator for
Enthiran. You are most welcome to leave comments at its FAC page. Thank you. —
Ssven2
Speak 2 me
09:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Would you clarify what you consider to be a breech of WP:CITEVAR in this edit? CITEVAR is usually invoked to discourage changing (without consensus) between major citation styles: using and not using cite/citation templates, or using inline citations vs. parenthetical references.
The addition of annotations, in the form of quotations from the source, is a common Wikipedia technique that is independent of citation style and in my experience has always been considered by the community to be an improvement. It is particularly helpful when the source is offline (as Reed is), the source requires translation, or a passage combines information from multiple sources. It aids verification, helps maintain source-text integrity, and helps avoid copyright violation or close paraphrasing, among other things.
In the edit in question, for instance, the technique highlights the fact that the cited source doesn't say, as the article does, that Elgar's letter to Jaeger was written in 1899. That adding annotations to this one source in this one article didn't reveal any larger issue is a testament to your good referencing work five years ago. Other editors will inevitably come along, however, and add information from Moore, say, and inline citations to McVeagh, rearrange text, etc. When they do, the annotations should help preserve your efforts. Worldbruce ( talk) 16:53, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Evening, any chance you could provide some input at the peer review?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:22, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I understand that about 2500 solvers send in the weekly prize crossword, so I don't normally bother even if I complete it because of the adverse odds. The (Easter?) holiday special was a larger than normal grid with an islands theme. It was so head-achingly difficult that it was more luck than judgement that I finished it. On that basis, it had to be worth a shot! Can't remember who the setter was, but too late for Araucaria. Cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. This month I've started asking the FAC nommers to take a stab at reducing the lead section (the current text at that link) down to between 900 and 1300 characters (counting characters on the page readers see, not in the edit window). Don't worry about perfect prose or MOS; I want to know which bits you think of as the important bits. I'm happy to do the condensing if you prefer. - Dank ( push to talk) 18:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@ Bencherlite: @ Dr. Blofeld: (and anyone else who sees this and may be interested) – I've been reviewing a Featured Article candidate on St Denys' Church, Sleaford, nominated by an editor new to FAC. One wants to encourage that sort of thing. If you, who know more about writing on churches and places than I do, have time and disposition to look in, it would be a kindness. – Tim riley talk 14:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Noted, will try to look tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Peter I. Vardy is an expert on churches but I don't think he feels comfortable reviewing. Still, it would benefit from the likes of @ Bencherlite: and him commenting at the FAC.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
To avoid cluttering the FAC, asking here—can you think of a better way to describe the location of Port Sunlight? I do agree that "near Liverpool" isn't ideal, but Liverpool is realistically the nearest place of which most Wikipedia readers will have heard—to a typical Australian, American etc "Wirral" or "Birkenhead" may as well be random words, while "Merseyside" isn't much better. There are certainly precedents for "go with the nearest town the readers can be assumed to know"—we describe Cheshunt as "in the London commuter belt", for instance. ‑ iridescent 19:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
it seems i'm not having a good evening - did not mean disrepect and have rolled back on my approach. It just seemed that the page was being rushed as promoted when it needs work yet, imo. I'll temper from here. Ceoil ( talk) 21:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
| |
|
|
This is a note to all participants in the recent peer review. Many thanks for your help; the article is now at WP:FAC Brianboulton ( talk) 20:48, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Good performance today! Precious again, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 05:52, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, Many thanks for your comments at PR for Diamonds Are Forever (novel). The article is now at FAC for further comments, should you have the time and inclination. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 20:34, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
|
Could I interest you in the peer review of Boroughitis? I assure you it isn't contagious. Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I could have sworn you or somebody in previous reviews said about not linking the wars. I'm sure somebody even said that the MoS guidelines advise against it. Any thoughts?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't know if you or stalkers are interested in signing up for this but I was the one who proposed an agreement originally. It's the largest newspaper resource in the world I believe with about 2.2 billion articles, or at least as they claim.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Brianboulton, SchroCat, Wehwalt, and anyone who may be kind enough to watch this page, I have Arnold Bax up for peer review, if I can interest any of you in this slightly offbeat English composer. No obligation, naturally, but glad of any comments that may be going. Tim riley talk 22:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Thankyou for your constructive comments during the peer review. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rod Steiger/archive1 is underway if you'd care to comment further. Cheers. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, at the GAR I've expressed some concerns about the "Views of critics" section. I think it would be better if rather than simply being a collection of quotes it was reformatted to form a coherent argument, with some analysis of her directing and style. I'm unsure whether I can really promote it to GA at the moment, any thoughts would be most welcome.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, you may be interested in taking a look at
c:Category:Victrola book of the opera, or tipping off someone else. There look like several hundred usably good/quality portraits of notable performers from a century or more ago, possibly a source of new Wikipedia biographies. There's no chance of me finding categories against performer name automatically on Commons, so this relies on good old editor knowledge and research. You may want to have a surf through
my book plates project, it's a treasure trove with over a quarter of a million illustrations. I hope to see lots of excitement for reusing lovely images from the 19th century.
--
Fæ (
talk)
15:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim,
I don't know how busy you are these days, but if you have time to review an article I currently have up for featured status, I would be grateful for any comments you might provide at the FAC. The article is called Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater Restaurant.
Neelix ( talk) 18:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
A good article?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your kind and constructive comments on this article. I wanted to discuss a few of the particulars with you as I go through making the suggested improvements. (Anything not brought up below, I have just changed per your comments.)
I believe I have addressed all your other points in my most recent edit to the article. I look forward to your next round of feedback. (Oh, and if your talk page wasn't the right place to put this, feel free to move it wherever it does go. This is my first time nominating an article for GA status.) — GrammarFascist contribs talk 00:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Discussion (1 October) moved from this page to Talk:Howard Sims/GA1. Original archived at end of September TR talk page. Tim riley talk 09:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Greetings to the House of Riley. Two matters of grave import:
Regards, Brianboulton ( talk) 15:38, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I have listed Bharat Ratna for peer review. Its currently a GA and I would like to take it FAC in the near future. I would really appreciate if you could find some time and provide your comments here. Thanks in advance. - Vivvt ( Talk)
|
Hey Tim, I intend to take this article for FAC. Would you mind offering some comments here? Thanks, — Vensatry (ping) 14:01, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you could give this a review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Marilyn Monroe/archive1? A core article if ever there was one which really needs a good review.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
This is a notification to all the recent PR contributors that the above article is now at FAC. Comments welcomed there.
Tim, I see you are working on VW – please keep in touch on this. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:08, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim Riley,
Re: "The Vortex" - Noel Coward
I hope this is the correct way of replying to your message to me. Thank you for your words.
I should explain that my feelings about the way the play, as described on the Wiki page, are strongly influenced by the fact that our (professional) theatre company is about to produce "The Vortex" in the Far East. However, some potential sponsors we have approached - not having read the script - have gone to look at the Wiki page and come away with the impression that this is a play about a man's addiction to cocaine and drug abuse in society in the 1920s. They have then turned us down: a major blow to us.
It is precisely because that entry and description of the play on the Wiki page is already a personal interpretation by someone that I changed it. It is not based on Coward's scipt. The play is first-and-foremost and principally about the mother's vanity and promiscuity and how that affects her relationship with her son, "Nicky". It most certainly is NOT principally about her "Nicky's" drug addiction to cocaine.
Indeed reading the play - essential- will show there is not one single mention of his being a cocaine user - not one. Indeed his use of drugs is only referred to twice in the script for a total of just eleven lines - in all. Hardly a major theme of the play.
This in not my interpretation of the play, Tim; it is based precisely and exactly on Coward's script. To say that the play is about Nicky's "severe cocaine addiction" or "drug abuse among the upper classes" (the latter statement being a complete nonsense) most certainly is a personal interpretation though and totally misleading.
So, I made changes because I believe the current page is someone's personal interpretation and that interpretation is wrong and damaging to producer's like ourselves who have difficult censorship rules in Asian countries to navigate. Most of all though the script confirms I am perfectly correct and it is the script that matters
I cant expect you to put-back my corrections I know but I do think someone official at Wiki should read the play and then decide for themselves based on Coward;s word's alone.
Thank you again for writing
Yours
John Faulkner www.britishtheatreplayhouse.com.sg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denningrichard ( talk • contribs) 05:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
HI Tim. I have nominated Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust for FLC at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust/archive1 and should be grateful if you have time to comment. Dudley Miles ( talk) 19:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Will try to look at it in a day or two! Funny coincidence but he was supposed to have been Frank Sinatra's favourite composer, and Sinatra was a classical music aficionado and liked a great range of composers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
I shall be absent all this week (Rome, gloat, gloat). Meanwhile I have completed my initial draft of the Bessie article. It is not formally reviewable yet – I have several footnotes to add, the lead image is unsatisfactory, the Appraisal needs expanding and the prose needs polishing and trimming, all of which I intend to do when I get back. I'd be very pleased, however, if you would give it an informal readthrough, and let ne know via my talkpage where you think the main weaknesses are?. Two quite surprising things I've found: she promoted very little if any parliamentary legislation during her 25 years in parliament, and in her last seven years she rarely even contributed to debates. She was apparently a good chairman of the Commons Catering Committee, though. Brianboulton ( talk) 08:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I hope your full visit to the Lake District did not turn out dry. Once your keyboard is no longer endangered by flooding, would you mind having a look at George Mason, at peer review? He spent a summer in Philadelphia once and did not like it very much. But it's for the new school tie and all that.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 11:51, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I cannot tell a lie. The Father of Our Country said "ignomy". My spellcheck doesn't like it either.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:39, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clifford Grey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page My Wife's Family. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Good evening Tim, how are you? I'm sorry to have taken so long to get to Vaughan Williams, but I got there in the end. Now here I am soliciting your thoughts—I have the "King of Con-men", Gregor MacGregor, up at peer review here. If you can find the time to look in I would appreciate it very much, as always. Thanks and I hope you're well as we approach Guy Fawkes' Night. — Cliftonian (talk) 21:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim Riley, a new pharaoh article is up as a good article candidate. I would be most grateful if you were interested in reviewing it some day. The article concerns Sheshi, who is paradoxically the best attested king of Egypt c. 1700 BC and "the one" about whom Egyptologists cannot agree on any single thing. The problem of understanding Sheshi's identity is deeply intertwined with that of piecing together the fall of the Middle Kingdom and the arrival of the famed Hyksos in Egypt. He may even have inspired the Biblical figure of Sheshai. In any case, thanks for your help and attention! Iry-Hor ( talk) 14:41, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Kailash29792 has nominated the article for FAC. Feel free to leave comments at its
FAC page.
—
Ssven2
Speak 2 me
09:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
If you want to, take a look at the article about Marie Serneholt which is this weeks TAFI article. Regards.-- BabbaQ ( talk) 20:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
[Template removed - causing technical problems with archiving] Labeling those who disagree with you in article layout discussions as "zealots" contravenes WP:ARBATC#All parties reminded, even if it may have been intended in a tongue-in-cheek away. Many editors are unaware that style discussions are subject to tighter civility restrictions, so I thought it sensible to inform you of this. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 04:11, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Back in February the article that I re-wrote on the TV sitcom Temperatures Rising was promoted to GA status. Since then the article has had some further refining, including a"once-over" by the Guild of Copy Editors. I have now submitted it again as an FAC. Since you supported it last time would you care to take a look at it once more? Jimknut ( talk) 17:15, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
|
–
As mentioned elsewhere, I am investigating GFH's "lost" Hamburg operas – not entirely lost, as it happens. I'm not making much use of Dent's superseded biography, but I need to cite a couple of statements. I only have access to the Gutenberg version which is unpaginated. I wonder if, when you're next in the BL, you could find the page refs for the following sections of the book, all from the first chapter:
I'd be much obliged if you can do this. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Bessie now ready for review comments. Any comments welcome. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your FA Ralph Vaughan Williams
I was again too late for reviewing, had to sing a piece first that we share, - thinking of recent events. DYK was up to the music. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
I wish Gerda spoke to me about music instead of infoboxes!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
In the new Midori Suzuki (soprano), could you please find out author and date of the Gramophone review? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Should we ignore the long-term pattern of bad behavior because you had a good experience? Are you able to understand and consider the experiences of others, even if they are at odds with your assessment? Or are you a solipsist, whose concern for the world ends with his physical body? Viriditas ( talk) 00:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
In recognition of your precious help in reviewing Ancient Egyptian pharaoh articles, with both precision and swiftness, I thereby award you this Barnstar of Diligence! Iry-Hor ( talk) 07:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC) |
Thank you so much, Iry-Hor! I am continually astonished not only by your scholarship but also by your skill in writing in a language not your own. I look forward to many more articles from you. Tim riley talk 21:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() | |
A Boy was Born |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I haven't yet received anything from you. Maybe you could just leave your comments on my talk page. Thanks for your interest.-- Ipigott ( talk) 16:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry to ask this, but my Handel researches have brought me to this important book. The parts that I need are in the attenuated online text but, infuriatingly, the online version is unpaginated. I am sure they do this to frustrate researchers and force them to buy the book, but this one costs over 200 quid! The page references I need are as follows:
These documents are all in the 1708 section. If on your next BL jaunt you could consult this tome and come up with some paging, I'd be very grateful (and £200 richer). Brianboulton ( talk) 20:22, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Can you help me to what this review says about a recording of Voces intimae (Sibelius) (or just add it there)? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Just to let you know, George Mason is [ FAC]. Many thanks for any comments. Hope you are well-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:55, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
The above article, to the PR of which you recently contributed, is now at FAC. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Can I interest you, perhaps, in the peer review for Wendell Willkie? He came to London once when the tourist trade was at an all-time low ... Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 16:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Tim and Wehwalt, I'll get to this one tonight. Really looking forward to it! You did the man justice. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() | The Cluestick is awarded to users who have demonstrated that they, in fact, have a clue. This Cluestick is awarded to Tim riley , someone 'gets' what's really going on, and keeps a vigilant eye... |
Thanks for putting in an unexpected word (above and beyond), in spite of all the shoutiness. Cheers!
THEPROMENADER
✎
✓
17:53, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Tim, we should really get William Sterndale Bennett at least up to GA for his 2016 bicentenary, no?-- Smerus ( talk) 13:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
|
I'm a bit ahead of myself, and I've finished the above, although I don't propose to put it to any formal review process until January when there should be more people about with time to look at articles. But I'd welcome a few informal comments on the talk page, if you have a moment. There is also the issue of the article's title (a move has been suggested on the talk page) and I'd like your views on that, too. (I've got another little music article on the go, but rest assured, from January onwards GBS will be my primary concern). Brianboulton ( talk) 21:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim,
Good day, I would like to take this opportunity to hear from your inputs and/or your thoughts on the above article's FAC-worthiness. I understand that you are one of User:Brianboulton's close associates, and hence I felt that it is also appropriate on my part to invite you to co-appraise. I have heard from one of your associates, Wehwalt, whom I was led to understand was another associate of yours and Brian to co-appraise.
I welcome you to drop by at the FAC at any time, without pressure or obligations. See you and take care ! :) Mr Tan ( talk) 10:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
To anyone kind enough to watch this page: SchroCat, aided and abetted by me, has Albert Ketèlbey up for peer review. Visitors will be most welcome. Tim riley talk 15:40, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
And another not very well known English composer, William Sterndale Bennett, is also up for PR, where comments will be gratefully received. Tim riley talk 18:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
What better way to start the year than with a Tim Riley article. I've got the TFA down to 1539 characters. It needs to be around 1150, but I don't have a preference what to cut. Tis the season; would you care to do the carving? - Dank ( push to talk) 19:10, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your "valediction to the late John Webber, who edited WP as Viva-Verdi" and "knew a hundred times more about Verdi"
It's a great way to start a new musical year: "Tutto nel mondo è burla ... Tutti gabbati! / "Everything in the world is a jest ... ". -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Please don't edit war. On Albert Ketèlbey, your bold edit was reverted and at that point you should be heading for the talk page to discuss, not re-reverting. I'll be happy to match you revert for revert at this stage if you attempt to force your personal preferences onto the article. You are wrong, by the way, about WP:CITEVAR. Your edit removed properly sourced material, using the proper citation style for the article. Further attempts to remove good sources for spurious reasons are like to be treated as disruptive. Please take this warning in the spirit in which it is intended. -- RexxS ( talk) 18:32, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! |
![]() |
|
|
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 16:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Nothing fancy. Just a simple thank you for all your help on the Copland Connotations article and a wish for the best for you in 2016. Merry Christmas, Tim. Jonyungk ( talk) 16:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | |
Seasonal greetings for 2015, and best wishes for 2016. Here's to another year's productive editing, with peace, goodwill and friendship to all! Brianboulton ( talk) 17:31, 19 December 2015 (UTC) |
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! | ![]() |
|
A very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones, and a joyous and prosperous 2016.
|
Martinevans123
Santas Grotto ... sends you warmest wishes for a:
"Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda"
May the true spirit of Christmas bless you with warmth and peace! ... And
"Mele Kalikimaka" (Hawaiian Merry Christmas)!!
and to everyone else who has been kind enough to send greetings I send my warm reciprocations, and to those who haven't, I send happy greetings anyway. Tim riley talk 21:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clifford Curzon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Ireland. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Opinions? (Stalkers?) I'm wondering if I should always use "although" in AmEng articles per COMMONALITY. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:13, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim riley: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Frankie talk 14:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC) [[
File:A book of country clouds and sunshine (1897), cropped.jpg|center|500px]]
Can we please discuss my edit and your subsequent reversion on the Noël Coward talk page? Seattle Jörg ( talk) 13:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Season's Greetings | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Poussin) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Benjamin Disraeli may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 22:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Alastair Sim may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 09:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Christmas! | |
Have a happy holiday season. May the year ahead be productive and happy. John ( talk) 18:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC) |
18Y |
Thank you to all who have made editing Wikipedia rewarding and enjoyable over the past ten years. Tim riley talk 12:10, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your reaching this milestone!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I have List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Bedfordshire at FLC. Comments gratefully received if you have the time. Happy new year. Dudley Miles ( talk) 22:34, 28 December 2015 (UTC)m
![]() | |
peace bell |
---|
Thank you for inspiration and support, including two excellent GA reviews in 2015, - thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:45, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
The {{ refbegin}} and {{ refend}} templates apply the same formatting as {{ reflist}} to other bibliographies or reference lists, one 'opening' and one 'closing'. The Benjamin Disraeli article was already using both, but with refend placed before refbegin, meaning that refbegin was unclosed and therefore applying the reference-style formatting to the rest of the article (including the succession and navigation boxes). The use of these templates is optional and I just placed the corresponding opening and closing template to those already in use. Their use in this article seemed appropriate given the length of the lists (and their use seemed to be the previous intention), hence why I added the 'missing' templates rather that deleting the existing ones. I hope this helps, matt br 09:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Kenneth MacMillan you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Kenneth MacMillan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Seattle --
Seattle (
talk)
21:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes! I have " We'll Never Have to Say Goodbye Again" open if you would like to review it. Thank you. Seattle ( talk) 04:08, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Running Man Barnstar | |
Thank you for all you have done to help me with the Boat Race articles. Tonight we hit a landmark, over 50% of the race articles are now Good or Featured Articles, which is a monumental achievement considering that none of the articles even existed eight months ago. Thanks again. The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:34, 3 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, Tim. I hope your holidays were pleasant. Today I created a peer review request for the Gary Cooper article that was promoted to GA last month. I spent the past two weeks making additional edits related to GA comments and suggestions. If you have the time, please review the article and leave any feedback at the peer review page in preparation for FAC nomination. Also, can you recommend any other experienced editors who might be interested in participating in this peer review? Regards, Bede735 ( talk) 02:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
To my embarrassment, English is my first language and I have never encountered that phrase before, at least not knowingly. Is it more commonly known in the UK than the US, perhaps? At any rate, I still dislike it and hold that the English Wikipedia is not the best place for it, as I think it would more often than not confuse people for whom English is not their first language. I won't press the matter further though, since it has no real bearing on the article, and I don't know if anyone else has expressed confusion over it. Thanks for enlightening me! Cyrenaic ( talk) 02:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello! I apologize for contacting you out of the blue with a request, but Ms. Gerda Arendt directed me here in response to a question I asked regarding a journal hosted online by ' Project MUSE.' Do you happen to know any editors here who might be members? Specifically, I'm looking for the information in this journal. As far as I can tell, it is only viewable to members of certain institutions. Thank you in advance for your time, and I hope the new year has found you well.- RHM22 ( talk) 15:56, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the text down to a little over 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank ( push to talk) 02:25, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
|
This is to inform you that Ralph Richardson , which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 28 January 2015. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. Have you ever tried the safari browser and the reader function?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
...we'll pass the Capstans round. I'm off on my travels tomorrow, but I've managed to get my story of nautical shenanagins, aka Girl Pat (1935 trawler) to peer review. I'd be most happy if you (and any other willing and faithful soul} would look at it and comment while I'm away. Obviously I won't be able to respond immediately, but it will give me something to look forward to when I get back on 26th. I hope all is well with you. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:27, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Congratulations on our Erasmus Prize! [1] -- Ssilvers ( talk) 19:56, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Why, please, did you revert my minor wording change in Benjamin Disraeli? ... Never mind; I just saw your comment in the wikicode. I understand. This British usage is new to me. -- Thnidu ( talk) 08:53, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I've just laid this article on peer review. It is easy reading, about a pleasant, unobjectionable character well beloved in American History ... oh wait, that's the other guy. Sorry. Would appreciate your comments, though.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 23:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hensley Henson you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ealdgyth --
Ealdgyth (
talk)
16:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Hensley Henson you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Hensley Henson for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ealdgyth --
Ealdgyth (
talk)
17:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I am a bit stuck on Hermeneutic style. An expert has promised to look at it, but at present he does not have time. If he does, I will no doubt make major amendments, so it seems premature to take it to PR. However, I came across an article I created years ago about an eccentric theory concerning the Ancestry of the Godwins, which seemed possible FA material, so I have put some work in improving it and taken it to PR at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ancestry of the Godwins/archive1. Your critical eye would be most welcome. Dudley Miles ( talk) 20:29, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Hensley Henson you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Hensley Henson for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ealdgyth --
Ealdgyth (
talk)
14:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, I think that setting back the edit of Rose Leclercq has the feel of you saying "this is mine and I like it this way". Am I wrong to take that view? I would have expected some explanation. I was hoping to do some work on this family, but I have just gone off the idea. Can you explain yourself? Victuallers ( talk) 16:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Your name has been invoked here, and I'm invoking it too, hopefully not in vain. Your opinion? Agreed that "the musicologist" might not be the best attribution. My position is that, per guidelines, policy (at WP:SUBSTANTIATE) and general experience with history articles, mentioning someone without at least suggesting what their connection is doesn't work. I can see that if you've got a sophisticated readership and an article that's focused on music criticism, there's an argument that they'll get what you're saying without attribution ... but we're talking about the Main Page viewership here. (And btw, that sentence has been a pain from day one. Dropping it is an option.) - Dank ( push to talk) 14:21, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Next person, this time from your table James Bates, sad, I will start, feel free to add, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
and TFA today, RR, precious again, says infobox aficionado and emotionalobserver -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:47, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say thanks for reviewing Mortimer Wheeler; it is much appreciated! Best, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 11:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Would you mind briefly revisiting the peer review, to comment on an issue raised by SchroCat concerning the most appropriate title for this article? I'd be most obliged for your wisdom. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Good evening. Many thanks for your valuable input into the peer review. The article is now at FAC. All further comments and input will be much appreciated, cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your recent thoughts and comments at the informal PR for Casino Royale (novel): The changes you suggested have been taken on board and implemented, and the article is much, much stronger than it was before. As such, I've gone ahead and opened the FAC, and I hope you will have time to have another look through at some point in the future. Thanks again. – SchroCat ( talk) 12:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I have consigned my little song of the sea to the tender mercies of WP:FAC, so any further comments or observations can be made there. Thanks for your interest and encouragement. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
If I may ask a further favor, Horace Greeley is lagging rather at FAC. If you have a spare moment, could you look in? I assure you that Greeley held the highest principles and was second to none in his regard for those of other races. Really.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 01:16, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I have put this article up for peer review again, since it failed FAC. Please have look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Shah Rukh Khan/archive2, and comment if there is any reason that it would not gain your support next time. Thanks, BollyJeff | talk 15:15, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim Riley, since after your review of Neferhotep I you proposed that I ping you in case I have another GAN, I am writing you to let you know that I have put up a new GAN article: Shepseskare. It would be my pleasure if you were interested in reviewing it. Iry-Hor ( talk) 22:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you again for your time and feedback during the GA and PR reviews of the Gary Cooper article. Throwing caution to the wind, I nominated the article as a featured article candidate. I would very much appreciate one last review and assessment when you have the time. By the way, I read the Olivier article, and I think you and SchroCat did an excellent job—a subject worthy of the effort. Regards, Bede735 ( talk) 14:36, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I have taken Hermeneutic style to Wikipedia:Peer review/Hermeneutic style/archive1. Your critical eye over it gratefully received. Dudley Miles ( talk) 15:12, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I happened upon the topic of eccentric dancing recently and have given this a push forward today. This seems to be mainly music hall/vaudeville but I see some jazz ballet described in this way too. It's an awkward topic because it is, by definition, unconventional and idiosyncratic. Perhaps you can help, if it pleases you ... Andrew D. ( talk) 16:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! This is to let you know that I have put up Shepseskare as FAC, see here. Iry-Hor ( talk) 18:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Tim. Thank you very much for your revision on Serralves. Far from discouraging me, your comments cast some light I needed to go on contributing to improve the article in the right direction. I was very naïf and certainly needed some guidance like yours. I really appreciate your help. When improved, I will submit the article for your peer review, if you please. Thank you very much indeed. Caravasar | talk — Preceding undated comment added 17:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
|
I have opened the peer review for the film. Please do suggest any changes that I should make before I go for FAC. — Ssven2 speak 2 me 04:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
In your 3rd comment about the "in order to" sentence, can you specify which sections have that sentence so that I can change them?
—
Ssven2
speak 2 me
07:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For all the excellent work you did on Larry Oliver! Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 22:30, 14 February 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Actors and Filmmakers Award of Excellence |
For your work in promoting one of the goliaths of the acting world, Sir Laurence Olivier to Featured Article status. A mighty achievement to be proud of! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC) |
Royal opera
Thank you for the London opera, another great article with dedication to details about the people behind an institution, - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
Three years ago, you were the twentieth recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Half Barnstar | |
To you for bringing Laurence Olivier to FA status. The other one's for Schrocat.
![]() |
Dear Tim, Yet another request for PR help, I'm afraid, although this one comes with an ready-made opportunity for a pun or two while comparing the subject matter to the content and prose! It concerns the Great Stink, a relatively brief event in London history that has had a beneficial effect that we all enjoy to this day. The PR can be found here, if you have the time to spare. If you don't, no worries! Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 23:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi! First of all many congratulations on Laurence Olivier for getting it to FA status! May I invite you to review Kareena Kapoor Khan filmography and comment at its FLC. If this message is annoying you, feel free to remove or ignore this message. -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 18:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. Does the article need more work before its day on the Main Page? I had to squeeze the summary down to around 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank ( push to talk) 00:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Oops. The character count on this one is 1296, but Bench recently said that that might be causing problems at ITN. I'm not sure about this, but I've agreed to keep it at no more than 1250 for now. Can you find 46 characters to cut? - Dank ( push to talk) 19:01, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I have now added a couple of images to make it more visually appealing and nominated for FAC. Thanks. Dudley Miles ( talk) 20:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry to be so slow about completing my review of your fine musical article, which I shall finish shortly. Could I ask you to revisit the Tillman FAC? A reviewer has expressed certain concerns.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 00:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Aver good afteroon to you! Many thanks for your help on the Great Stink. The article is now at FAC for further consideration, should you wish to partake further. Many thanks! - SchroCat ( talk) 16:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Bramshill House passed FAC, thankyou for your input. I've opened a peer review for William Burges's The Tower House. Comments will be most welcome. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Yet more claims on your time: the Ghost Ship awaits comments at PR. I'd be very glad if you'd visit. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim, thank you for the expeditious GA review and the very kind words. I have started a peer review for Oom Paul here and look forward to hearing the quibbles you mentioned if/when you find the time. Cheers and I hope you are well. — Cliftonian (talk) 12:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thought this might interest you as a Coward buff I believe. It's still in rough stages of development.. Do you have anything in your books to verify what is written and anything further? I'd guess it went beyond the 1930s..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Any luck with finding content on the Ritz? Good to see BTW that at least some editors are respectful [2]. I wasn't aware of the Porter article, should be taken to FAC at some point.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
I have opened the FAC for
Enthiran. Feel free to leave comments.
—
Ssven2
Speak 2 me
14:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello! We haven't met, but I noticed that you are a respected and active reviewer and writer of high-quality content. I wondered if you might be interested in helping me with an article I wrote that is now at peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Irataba/archive1. It's about a Mohave Chief who was quite an interesting character. The FAC was recently closed due to issues with the prose, but since I am about the only person who has edited the page it's getting more difficult for me to find and resolve problems. I'd be appreciative if you took a look, but I understand if you are too busy or uninterested. Thanks! Rationalobserver ( talk) 20:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Atttention talk page stalkers. It's not quite perfect but if you copy the contents of this into your User:Tim riley/common.css and save you should be able to hide the infoboxes in most biographies with just a photo in place. I've not yet solved the issue of how to rid of the box outline around it, but on my own screen hiding the silly trivia and redundant content in them is a considerable improvement. Obviously this won't change our outlook on the enforcement of infoboxes in articles we've got to FA and the wider issue of them often making wikipedia look less professional and trivial, but at least in our own eyes it is better to not see them in biographies. If you could all give it a try in your User@xxx/common.css see if it is an improvement. Hope this helps.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:09, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
SchroCat Give it a try and look at Peter Sellers, no identibox!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello there! Could I trouble you with your opinion in a notability matter? Thank you, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 13:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Mary Celeste is now at FAC. Please look if you have time. Brianboulton ( talk) 00:10, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
|
Hello, Mr. RileyTim. I'm sorry to bother you with a(nother) request, but I wonder if you could please take a look at
the FAC for
1804 dollar, if you don't find the subject matter too dull. It seems to have gotten little interest since I nominated it. I know that reviews aren't strictly QPQ, but please do feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have something that needs reviewing.-
RHM22 (
talk)
05:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar |
Today's featured article,
Hugh Walpole, was a fascinating read. Thank you so much.
![]() |
Thankyou for your input into the peer review. The article is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim—this is just a note to let you know that Uncle Paul is now at FAC here. Hope you're well, cheers for all your help thus far. — Cliftonian (talk) 13:10, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello, this is to let you know that Unas (another 5th Dynasty Egyptian pharaoh) is now a GA candidate (and hopefully next onto FAC). I would be most grateful if you accepted to review it, or otherwise, if you could point another user to me for a possible review. This would greatly shorten the (usually) very long wait between GA nomination and review. Note this article received around 40,000 visits/year. Iry-Hor ( talk) 14:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Excuse Mr. Riley,
I have been working on the Stephen Sondheim page for some years now, and I would truly love some input on how to improve the page. (we corresponded about four years ago on a peer review for this page). I would love to get pictures on the page, and the pages that are featured/good articles all have a great array of photos. I would truly appreciate some, or any help in this matter.
Thank You Phaeton23 ( talk) 16:15, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Tim! I cannot thank you enough for the input! If you could pass the word to your Sondheimian friends, that be greatly appreciated! Thanks a million Tim! Phaeton23 ( talk) 16:39, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Last year you kindly contributed to the above article's peer review or or FAC or both. An issue has arisen from yesterday's TFA appearance, and is under discussion on the article's talk. Briefly: an editor added into the text the cited information that Bondfield's was privately known as "Maggie", and then incorporated this into the lead so the subject appeared as Margaret Grace ("Maggie") Bondfield. I have removed the nickname from the lead, and stated my position on the talkpage. I would be pleased if you could visit and briefly comment there. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Wikimedia UK Barnstar | |
Dear Tim, thanks for running that editathon yesterday . | ||
this WikiAward was given to Tim riley by Were SpielChequers on 16:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC) for contributions to the UK chapter |
Wasn't there something to do with Charlie Chaplin at the event Tim?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jenna Roberts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cinderella (ballet). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
.
Hi Tim,
I hope 2015 has been going well for you. I have started a new FAC here for an article called Mind Meld. Considering that I have appreciated your input into my previous FACs, I thought that I would ask if you have time to participate in this one. I would be glad for any constructive comments you are willing to provide.
Neelix ( talk) 14:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Re 'His first novel to achieve real success was his third...'. I note that you reverted my substitution of 'commercial' for 'real', which is not an encyclopedic word, and not a very meaningful one in any context. Valetude ( talk) 14:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for Onegin, - I wonder if you could start a stub on Cranko's Turn of the Shrew, to fit in here? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
ps: while that should be soon, a long-term plan is GA for Fauré's Requiem, by November, hopefully with you? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Tim, You were kind enough to comment at PR and FAC on Casino Royale; could I ask for a similar favour for the next instalment of the Bond series: Live and Let Die, which is now at PR? Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 11:58, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Thankyou for your input at the peer review. Irataba is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate that you won't defend doing it. AgnosticAphid talk 22:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim; hope that you are well. Upon completion of the Mortimer Wheeler GAN, you requested that I let you know as and when I sent the article to Peer Review and/or FAC. Well, I've now done the former, and you can access it here: Wikipedia:Peer review/Mortimer Wheeler/archive1. No pressure to actually undertake any reviewing unless you feel the desire to, but I thought that I'd let you know. Best for now, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:48, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your thoughts on Live and Let Die at the recent peer review. The article is now at FAC for wider consideration should you wish to comment further. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I am speaking of Tristis est anima mea (attributed to Kuhnau), not my mood. "Stay calm and factual", I tell myself, quoting myself from 2013. Far be it from me to use words Jesus spoke, but ... - Question is if you might find further sources for the music section, or how I would source observations to the score. We will sing it on Friday. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Look: Georgette Tsinguirides, on the job for 70 years with the same employer Stuttgart Ballet! I have a FAC open, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:27, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
A note to anyone kind enough to watch this page that I have put Ravel's article up for peer review, where all comments will be gratefully received. Tim riley talk 17:40, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
And still the Tower House hasn't passed.. It feels like this particular FAC has been open 3 months for some reason! Happy Easter BTW!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Aymatth started Pierre-Joseph Ravel upon request, not sure if you really care but still..♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for the review Tim. Dudley Miles ( talk) 11:41, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey there, I have began to improve the article according to your review, but I somehow don't know how to flesh ref 12 out cos it's in German. :( That's all that I need help on. Thanks for the review btw. :) Vincent60030 ( talk) 14:05, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Tim, Thanks very much for this. Hopefully we'll have better luck than we did with R3! Take your time... I don't hold out much hope for it first time around to be honest. Cheers! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 13:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim. Thank you for reviewing the article and for your suggested improvements. I had made some alterations to the article and I believe that I have addressed all of your qualms. Hopefully everything is in order. Thanks, Kyriakos ( talk) 15:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I'd be very grateful if you could give Castell Coch a read and comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Castell Coch/archive1. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:08, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I have opened the second FAC for the article. Please do let me know if you would like to make any comments. Thanks. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 02:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
|
...for any headaches I may have caused. It looks like Maunus has unwatchlisted English language and disassociated himself from the article. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
our joint effort, Hallelujah, in fond memory, - I decorated my pages with Hallelujah, despised and rejected, to mark the occasion. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I have been fairly preoccupied recently, but betweentimes have managed to get Jarrow March into a reviewable state, and it awaits attention at peer review. You will notice that your grandfather played a leading role in the march, and that your spiritual grandfather (H. Henson) thought they were all a bunch of dirty commies. I'd be very pleased if you could look it over and make such observations as you think fitting. Brianboulton ( talk) 18:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Running Man Barnstar | |
Hey Tim, just a quick barnstar to say thanks for the many reviews of Boat Race articles you've conducted over the past year. As of this morning, I completed my (initial) goal of ensuing that every Boat Race had, not only its own article, but one that was either of GA or FA status: we now have 158 GAs and 3 FAs that we can all be proud of! It doesn't stop here, for me at least, I'm going to keep up with improving the quality of the GAs and look for more FA opportunities. Plus, there's the small matter of 70 Women's Boat Race articles to get up and running! But thanks again, I couldn't have done it without your help. The Rambling Man ( talk) 15:39, 16 April 2015 (UTC) |
Tim, a brief note to thank your again for your peer review of the above and to let you know it is now at FAC where, again, your comments would be very much appreciated. Best regards. KJP1 ( talk) 17:16, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Tim - really grateful for your support. Now, a big favour. We're having a debate about Burges's death from "a chill". The consensus is we need a footnote. The bottom line appears to be that the Victorians used "chill" or "fever" for a range of illnesses that they didn't fully understand. Prince Albert was said to have caught a "severe chill" which Jenner later (mis?)diagnosed as typhoid. Cholera and influenza were others. Any ideas where I might find an authoritative source for the Victorians use of "chill" as a portmanteau term? Not my area at all. As an aside, I wonder if we could work The Importance of Being Earnest into the footnote:
Really appreciate any advice. KJP1 ( talk) 18:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Tim, I vaguely remember that you had ideas about replacement of the refs to reviews in Gramophone. I am interest in referencing the 1978 La clemenza di Tito recording with Marga Schiml. Btw, I forgot about "our" ballet which made it too late for the 50 years anniversary, but the dancer is in prep for her birthday tomorrow, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Sunday thanks, and did you see how smiled mentioning DFD? - Today the Stuttgart Ballet again: DYK ... that Georgette Tsinguirides, employed by the Stuttgart Ballet for 70 years, was the first choreologist in Germany and has taught ballets by Cranko and MacMillan to generations of dancers? - 70 years! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
To anyone kind enough to watch this page: I have put Ravel up for FAC, where all contributions will be most gladly received. Tim riley talk 16:59, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
That's so kind of all of you, and I am much touched. I really enjoyed writing about Ravel, though I am looking forward to equal enjoyment in my next (joint) FAC project, P G Wodehouse, who is still lurking in a sandbox at present. He lived longer and wrote more than Ravel did, so he may prove a mightier task. Tim riley talk 15:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim, sorry to bother you but does this ring any bells with you? I am wondering if it is someone returning who has form in this field, but I cannot remember any specific examples. So far, only one edit, but if they are some kind of self-appointed Classical Music Delinking Expert™ it could become tedious. If this has no sense of familiarity for you, please don't worry, and apologies for wasting your time. Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 17:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
I have now nominated the Jarrow March at FAC. Any further thoughts, comments etc would be much welcomed. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. This is to inform you that Shah Rukh Khan is now up for FAC again at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Shah Rukh Khan/archive2. You said that I could ping you when this occurred. BollyJeff | talk 12:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Happy to inform you that the article has been promoted. Thank you for your support, Tim. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 13:24, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I say! Thank you very much. A good job I'm not Belgian. Tim riley talk 19:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Thankfully I am, born and bred in Bruges ;-) I have some carrots to give the pony if he gets hungry!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I note your request for citations. You may be aware that the current page is a much edited-down version of the previous page. Perhaps whoever supplied that lengthy material might be the one to approach for sources. Valetude ( talk) 15:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
As you have kindly added comments to one or more of the FLC nominations of Scheduled monuments in Somerset I wanted to let you know that the final list, List of scheduled monuments in Mendip, is nomination for Featured List status at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of scheduled monuments in Mendip/archive1. If you had any comments that would be great.— Rod talk 20:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, I have recently been working on the Burning of Parliament, which is now at PR for comment. Any input you could have would be much appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 20:01, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
![]() | On 2 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Onegin (Cranko), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Onegin (Cranko). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Harrias talk 09:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Remembering fondly your collection for Marga Schiml, it's now in Main space, but under construction, - comments welcome for {{ classical discography row}}, a baby, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I changed BWV 22 recordings to the more compact format and would appreciate your eyes on it and comments before moving ahead, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:33, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
See Barra etc [3] -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:15, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
I've addressed most of the issues raised. Asked for help on OCLCs and will need to dig amongst my book collection for a definition of secondary railway. Mjroots ( talk) 19:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
|
To any fellow editors who may watch this page: I have nominated Verdi's Falstaff for FAC. The nomination is my tribute to the late John Webber, who edited as Viva-Verdi, with whom I worked extensively on the article. I hope I can do him justice. All comments gratefully received. Tim riley talk 14:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Irataba is back at FAC: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Irataba/archive3. We look forward to your comments there. RO (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Slim pickings, I'm afraid, from my shelves. There are two references to her in Freedom's Cause: Lives of the Suffragettes by Fran Abrams (Profile Books, London 2003, ISBN 9781861974259), both in the chapter on Emily Davison. Page 164 mentions Yates as an associate of Davison's from the Royal Holloway College; p. 173 says that Yates was among those who kept vigil at Davison's bedside after the latter's unfortunate encounter with the king's horse. Not much to get your teeth in there. But there is a very informative essay on the old girl in The Women's Suffrage Movement: A Reference Guide 1866-1928, and that's online, here. Just about all you really need to know. I'll keep an eye open for anything more. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I see you've very quickly picked up Carl Nielsen. I'm honoured to see we have such an expert on the job. As you will see, there's been quite a bit of work on the article since we were first in touch. Straightening out the referencing has been a major task but I think everything is more or less in order now. Perhaps you could alert me when you start commenting. I may be able to help out with the follow-up.-- Ipigott ( talk) 14:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Delightful! Let me know if and when I can be of any use reviewing Ms Wulf's article. Tim riley talk 07:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Re: filling out the music section: there are some possibly useful comments in Roger Parker's essay in Grove Music Online, here. Also, I remember there's quite a lot about Falstaff in Charles Osborne's Complete Operas of Verdi; unfortunately I've lost my copy of that book but I reckon it's fairly accessible. I'm looking through my books to see it there's anything else of substance. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:26, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim, how are you? I hope you're doing well. Brian and I have just finished drafting a new article on the Mutiny on the Bounty and now have it at peer review here. Any contributions you might care to make would as always be more than welcome. — Cliftonian (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Does this mean it is incorrect to use "Infobox:Person", summarizing key census data up front, for historical figures? Jmg38 ( talk) 17:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Tim riley: it occured to me that you might be a really good fit for the Wikipedia Library's account coordination volunteer team, because you have been a really strong contributor and really good at interacting with other users! Account coordination only requires a limited amount of time (a few hours a week at peak time), helping screen and approved editors for one (or two) of our donations at WP:TWL/Journals. Its a relatively limited amount of time per month. Would you be interested? Check out our application at Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Coordinators/Signup, Sadads ( talk) 23:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Just in case you didn't get the ping. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 10:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
I would like to thank you, Tim, for the excellent suggestions you made for further work on Carl Nielsen which has just been promoted to FA in time for the 150th anniversary on 9 June. On the strength of this success, I intend to work on the Jean Sibelius article in time for his 150th anniversary on 8 December. The article needs more work than Nielsen did when you stepped in but we also have more time. Let me know if you are interested.-- Ipigott ( talk) 15:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I would like to thank SchroCat the same but do not feel welcome, - please share ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
To anyone who is kind enough to watch this here talk page: SchroCat and I have been overhauling the article on Wodehouse, and have put it up for peer review. All contributions gratefully received, Tim riley talk 12:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
|
I've laid Warren G. Harding at peer review. Your views welcome. I've laboured long to bear a long article, I'm afraid, but when you have a tempest in a Teapot ...-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Could you take a peek at the first line and tell me if "catalog number" turns your stomach? - Dank ( push to talk) 15:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your swift review of Borders Railway! RGloucester — ☎ 19:40, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
While I bask momentarily in the afterglow of the Mutiny before returning to the travails of Jeremy (too long by 1500), would you mind doing a brief talkpage review for The Ordeal of Gilbert Pinfold? I don't want a formal peer review if I can help it, but I'd be glad of your opinion along with those of a few others. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. Based on your participation at Verdi's Falstaff, I thought you might consider working on Don Carlos with the idea of getting the opera promoted in time to appear on the main page for the opera's 150th anniversary on March 11, 2017. I know that's a ways away, but since you tend to be busy I thought I would throw out the idea now. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 23:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim,
Might you have the time to give the JC's Girls article a look-over? I have the article up for an FAC here, and I would be grateful for any comments you might provide in the discussion.
Neelix ( talk) 01:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I have Æthelwulf at peer review and should be most grateful for your advice. I am a bit worried that this one is somewhat turgid, and hopefully you can suggest how to make it more readable. Dudley Miles ( talk) 17:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I have sent Pinfold to WP:FAC on the basis of the talkpage comments to which you kindly contributed. I have been saving my peer review slot for the much more substantial Jeremy Thorpe. The PR is now open, and your comments there will be much appreciated. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Re my deleted edit, you might think of a better word than 'deface' for a perfectly legit addition, suitably referenced. There are wiki vandals about, but I am not one of them. (I do note, however, that Featured Articles merit special treatment.) Valetude ( talk) 14:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
How's that? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 06:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I read your GA review on BWV 243a with much interest. A point you write about is the italicisation and/or enclosing in quotes of Magnificat, "Magnificat anima mea", "Esurientes" etc. You refer to the MoS, in part to MOS:QUOTETITLE. However that same page also contains the following (in the section Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Neither):
Works named by a generic title: Symphony No. 2 by Gustav Mahler ..., Shakespeare's Sonnet 130 ..., The Magnificat by Schütz, ... the Adagio sometimes attributed to Albinoni.
That extends to movements of compositions: e.g. "The first movement of BWV 1047 has no tempo indication, the second and third are an Andante and an Allegro assai. Not: ... an "Andante" and an "Allegro assai" – and even less: ... an Andante and an Allegro assai. Similarly, not "Esurientes", nor Esurientes, but Esurientes, not even when a full title of a movement is used: Magnificat anima mea, not "Magnificat anima mea", nor Magnificat anima mea.
When referring to words that are sung (not to the movement of the composition, i.e. not referring to a title of a composition nor to one of its constituent parts), italicize foreign words would apply per MOS:FOREIGN, e.g. "The ritornello introduces a motif moving up, later sung on Esurientes implevit bonis." (but that is unrelated to style guides on titles). -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 11:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, After a recent re-write, the Hitler Diaries are now at peer review, should you have the time and inclination. Any and all thoughts on the article are most welcome. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 11:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for your comments at the Chetro Ketl peer review. The article is now a featured article candidate, and I'd like to invite you to comment there. Thanks! RO (talk) 17:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad to see you're back, and I look forward to your comments at the Chetro Ketl FAC. RO (talk) 15:26, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, just a note to let you know as a participant in the peer review that Sir Hugh is now at FAC here. Thanks for all your help earlier and I hope you're enjoying your holiday. Cheers, — Cliftonian (talk) 06:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
|
The Oceanides, I found that article - author's first, act of love - and nominated it for DYK, - it graces the Main page right now. I think it has GA potential and will tell the author tomorrow how to nominate, - if you would be inclined to review in your kind way, that would make life easier for the user who mentioned discouragement today. - Different topic: You can now say: Kathleen Ferrier recorded Bach's Mass in B minor with George Enescu. Work in progress, comments welcome, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Returning from a concert, music for the soul, Choir of King's College, Cambridge, conducted by Stephen Cleobury, singing all-English composers, Tye, Gibbons, Byrd, Hacomplaynt, after intermission Vaughan Williams, Harvey, Howells and BB, theme of A Boy was Born, - very pleasing to see that spelling which unfortunately still contradicts this house's rules, - the singing boys were very impressive! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim Riley, I was wondering he you might consider reviewing yet another article on a pharaoh: Menkauhor Kaiu? This article is part of the series I am building up concerning the 5th Dynasty and which, thanks in no small part to your work, already comprises Unas, Shepseskare (both FA), Sahure and Pyramid of Unas (GA). I hope that Menkauhor will make it to FA, in particular since I have received the help of a professional Egyptologist for this article. Iry-Hor ( talk) 11:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your excellent comments on the recent Hitler Diaries PR; the article has now moved on to FAC, should you wish to comment further. Thanks again – SchroCat ( talk) 11:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your comments at the recent peer review (and also its GA review back in 2012). Bentworth is now a featured article candidate, and it would be great if you could comment there. Thanks! JAG UAR 20:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
To anyone who is kind enough to watch this page, may I mention a second-time-round FAC that languished at first attempt for lack of visitors: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hastings Line/archive2. I have commented there, and I think comments from others will be welcomed. Tim riley talk 20:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Anyone who is quixotic enough to dip into this page may be interested – as I am – in the peer review of this pharaoh. I, of course, have been sitting on a canopic jar full of lungs for 4,000 years, but even so Menkauhor Kaiu is before my time, so all help will be welcome. Tim riley talk 18:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'd really appreciate your thoughts here. I'm trying to figure out what to doo going forwards. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 01:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
This is to advise peer reviewers of the above article that I have now nominated it at FAC, and will welcome any further comments. Brianboulton ( talk) 20:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
ITN: As soon as Isolde finished "Mild und leise" I had her article started ;) - More for you: Vaughan Williams, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I did find... some Nabucco images...
I can't help but feel it has the æsthetics of a Vegas stage show, though. Any thoughts on the Il trovatore images? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 00:24, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
File:Frédéric Lix - Auguste Trichon - Giuseppe Verdi's Macbeth (1865 revision) - Original.jpg says it's Act I, Scene 2. But, at the same time, the BNF have set designs for Act II, Scene 5, and Act II Scene 6.
Did the French version fail because the performance got hacked to pieces and rearranged? Because this is pretty clearly Act II, Scene 3 in the standard form. There's Banquo's ghost and everything, unless I'm forgetting something about the end of Act I and Duncan's ghost appears where Banquo will be later or something. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 09:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I wondered if you or a page stalker would be interested in getting Frank Sinatra up to FA in time for his centenary on December 12? I know We hope potentially might be but she's left wikipedia sadly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Any chance of you looking at my latest Indian cinema FAC? It just reached the older nominations marking point. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge/archive1. BollyJeff | talk 21:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim - there are a number of reasons why 'unprecedented' should be removed:
More specifically in this case with 'nearly unprecedented' - the additional word 'nearly' is adding on a layer of unnecessary jargon. An encyclopedic article should focus on facts (quantifiable, qualitative, etc). Stating that something is nearly unprecedented is like saying it is almost amazing, trying to make more out of something than really is there.
The best use of 'unprecedented' would be a situation that causes precedence. So we have to consider the root of the word... Precedence means that something LIKE that has never happened before - so much so that this incident is used as a model for things to come, a new law or set of rules/guidelines is created to deal with the situation next time, etc.
In most cases, simply using 'unprecedented' when discussing something containing a numerical value (sports record, streak of consecutive dates, large salaries or sports player contract values, etc) is an improper use of the word (see #1 - #3 above). It could be re-written to say that this streak is perhaps second only to [xxxx]... but the onus for that would be on the original author making such a claim.
It's best just to state facts and move on. Entirelybs ( talk) 20:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I have divined that you gentlemen are talking about the Arthur Sullivan article. While it's true that the run was "nearly unprecedented", as only one other show had ever run longer, I've added more specific information. What do you think of it, Tim? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 02:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
What ho, and all that. I'm being a pest on the Bond front again, with book three of the series, Moonraker, which is now at PR, should you have either the time or inclination to visit. Many thanks and pip pip. – SchroCat ( talk) 22:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Tim, for all your constructive comments during the review. We now have an article which looks to me as if it is a candidate for FA. And as you will have noticed, with Sgvrfjs we have a highly competent and cooperative editor to take it further down the line. What do you think? We are still hoping to have the main Sibelius article at FA or at least GA by S's 150th anniversary on 8 December but in the meantime it would be good to have an article relating to Sibelius on the front page. Any further advice you may have would be greatly appreciated.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. If you can look at List of Local Nature Reserves in Hertfordshire at FLC I should be most grateful. Dudley Miles ( talk) 18:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, any chance you could review this one for GA? Ritchie and We hope may have some further things to add but I think it's decent for GA now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
That 150th birthday is on 10 August, - a bit of attention there would be nice, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Master Ritchie has now finished. Look forward to further comments if there's any!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:07, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim Riley, this is to let you know, as you requested, that the article on Menkauhor Kaiu is now at FAC, see here. Iry-Hor ( talk) 11:50, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim,
Thank you very much for your review of the JC's Girls article during its FAC. The article has been promoted to featured status and I have nominated it to go up on the main page here. I have also started a FAC for the " Sisters at Heart" article here. If you have time to contribute to the discussion, your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 14:24, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Tim, can you take a look at Kill 'Em All, which I nominated for FA a couple of months ago? It desparately needs reviewers, and since you've been doing FAs for quite some time, thought to give you a call. The nomination is here, and any input will be much appreciated. Have a nice day.-- Retrohead ( talk) 19:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Your way on the Faure thing is the wrong way, but it's not worth trying to convice you over. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:34, August 5, 2015 (UTC)
In undoing my edit to P. G. Wodehouse you claimed "The Church's own website calls it "St Nicholas" with no possessive. The WP article is wrong" Which website would that be? That the church in Guildford is dedicated to Saint Nicolas (NOT Nicholas) is confirmed by the current church website - https://saintnics.com/ and the former one - https://www.stnicolas-guildford.org.uk St Nicolas is confirmed by A Church Near You; St Nicolas, Guildford - http://www.achurchnearyou.com/guildford-st-nicolas/ by the Facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/saintnicolasguildford and the linked school, St Nicolas CofE Aided Infant School, Guildford - https://www.st-nicolas-guildford.com/ You can even read the signage on the image used on the church's Wikipedia page - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/St_Nicholas%27_Church%2C_Bury_Street%2C_Guildford_%28April_2014%2C_from_Northwest%29_%281%29.JP I accept that the listing text does use Nicholas but that is often in error. The weight of evidence clearly backs Nicolas. Nedrutland ( talk) 14:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I looked in at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/J. Gordon Edwards filmography/archive2, and I think anyone kind enough to watch my talk page may also enjoy dipping in. Tim riley talk 21:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your PR and FAC comments and/or edits to Chetro Ketl, which is now a featured article. It was a long and interesting process, but thanks to a wealth of insights and suggestions the article is now among our best. Thanks for taking time out of your busy editing schedule to help me. RO (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
|
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Tear, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Tomlinson and Royal Opera. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim! The above list is currently at FLC here. Can you review it? -- Frankie talk 17:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim, it's been quite a while. How are things going?
The article on the first talking picture in
Tamil,
Kaildas (1931) is at FAC and is nominated by
Kailash29792, who was also the co-nominator for
Enthiran. You are most welcome to leave comments at its FAC page. Thank you. —
Ssven2
Speak 2 me
09:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Would you clarify what you consider to be a breech of WP:CITEVAR in this edit? CITEVAR is usually invoked to discourage changing (without consensus) between major citation styles: using and not using cite/citation templates, or using inline citations vs. parenthetical references.
The addition of annotations, in the form of quotations from the source, is a common Wikipedia technique that is independent of citation style and in my experience has always been considered by the community to be an improvement. It is particularly helpful when the source is offline (as Reed is), the source requires translation, or a passage combines information from multiple sources. It aids verification, helps maintain source-text integrity, and helps avoid copyright violation or close paraphrasing, among other things.
In the edit in question, for instance, the technique highlights the fact that the cited source doesn't say, as the article does, that Elgar's letter to Jaeger was written in 1899. That adding annotations to this one source in this one article didn't reveal any larger issue is a testament to your good referencing work five years ago. Other editors will inevitably come along, however, and add information from Moore, say, and inline citations to McVeagh, rearrange text, etc. When they do, the annotations should help preserve your efforts. Worldbruce ( talk) 16:53, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Evening, any chance you could provide some input at the peer review?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:22, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I understand that about 2500 solvers send in the weekly prize crossword, so I don't normally bother even if I complete it because of the adverse odds. The (Easter?) holiday special was a larger than normal grid with an islands theme. It was so head-achingly difficult that it was more luck than judgement that I finished it. On that basis, it had to be worth a shot! Can't remember who the setter was, but too late for Araucaria. Cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. This month I've started asking the FAC nommers to take a stab at reducing the lead section (the current text at that link) down to between 900 and 1300 characters (counting characters on the page readers see, not in the edit window). Don't worry about perfect prose or MOS; I want to know which bits you think of as the important bits. I'm happy to do the condensing if you prefer. - Dank ( push to talk) 18:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@ Bencherlite: @ Dr. Blofeld: (and anyone else who sees this and may be interested) – I've been reviewing a Featured Article candidate on St Denys' Church, Sleaford, nominated by an editor new to FAC. One wants to encourage that sort of thing. If you, who know more about writing on churches and places than I do, have time and disposition to look in, it would be a kindness. – Tim riley talk 14:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Noted, will try to look tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Peter I. Vardy is an expert on churches but I don't think he feels comfortable reviewing. Still, it would benefit from the likes of @ Bencherlite: and him commenting at the FAC.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
To avoid cluttering the FAC, asking here—can you think of a better way to describe the location of Port Sunlight? I do agree that "near Liverpool" isn't ideal, but Liverpool is realistically the nearest place of which most Wikipedia readers will have heard—to a typical Australian, American etc "Wirral" or "Birkenhead" may as well be random words, while "Merseyside" isn't much better. There are certainly precedents for "go with the nearest town the readers can be assumed to know"—we describe Cheshunt as "in the London commuter belt", for instance. ‑ iridescent 19:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
it seems i'm not having a good evening - did not mean disrepect and have rolled back on my approach. It just seemed that the page was being rushed as promoted when it needs work yet, imo. I'll temper from here. Ceoil ( talk) 21:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
| |
|
|
This is a note to all participants in the recent peer review. Many thanks for your help; the article is now at WP:FAC Brianboulton ( talk) 20:48, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Good performance today! Precious again, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 05:52, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, Many thanks for your comments at PR for Diamonds Are Forever (novel). The article is now at FAC for further comments, should you have the time and inclination. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 20:34, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
|
Could I interest you in the peer review of Boroughitis? I assure you it isn't contagious. Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I could have sworn you or somebody in previous reviews said about not linking the wars. I'm sure somebody even said that the MoS guidelines advise against it. Any thoughts?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't know if you or stalkers are interested in signing up for this but I was the one who proposed an agreement originally. It's the largest newspaper resource in the world I believe with about 2.2 billion articles, or at least as they claim.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Brianboulton, SchroCat, Wehwalt, and anyone who may be kind enough to watch this page, I have Arnold Bax up for peer review, if I can interest any of you in this slightly offbeat English composer. No obligation, naturally, but glad of any comments that may be going. Tim riley talk 22:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Thankyou for your constructive comments during the peer review. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rod Steiger/archive1 is underway if you'd care to comment further. Cheers. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, at the GAR I've expressed some concerns about the "Views of critics" section. I think it would be better if rather than simply being a collection of quotes it was reformatted to form a coherent argument, with some analysis of her directing and style. I'm unsure whether I can really promote it to GA at the moment, any thoughts would be most welcome.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, you may be interested in taking a look at
c:Category:Victrola book of the opera, or tipping off someone else. There look like several hundred usably good/quality portraits of notable performers from a century or more ago, possibly a source of new Wikipedia biographies. There's no chance of me finding categories against performer name automatically on Commons, so this relies on good old editor knowledge and research. You may want to have a surf through
my book plates project, it's a treasure trove with over a quarter of a million illustrations. I hope to see lots of excitement for reusing lovely images from the 19th century.
--
Fæ (
talk)
15:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim,
I don't know how busy you are these days, but if you have time to review an article I currently have up for featured status, I would be grateful for any comments you might provide at the FAC. The article is called Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater Restaurant.
Neelix ( talk) 18:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
A good article?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your kind and constructive comments on this article. I wanted to discuss a few of the particulars with you as I go through making the suggested improvements. (Anything not brought up below, I have just changed per your comments.)
I believe I have addressed all your other points in my most recent edit to the article. I look forward to your next round of feedback. (Oh, and if your talk page wasn't the right place to put this, feel free to move it wherever it does go. This is my first time nominating an article for GA status.) — GrammarFascist contribs talk 00:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Discussion (1 October) moved from this page to Talk:Howard Sims/GA1. Original archived at end of September TR talk page. Tim riley talk 09:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Greetings to the House of Riley. Two matters of grave import:
Regards, Brianboulton ( talk) 15:38, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I have listed Bharat Ratna for peer review. Its currently a GA and I would like to take it FAC in the near future. I would really appreciate if you could find some time and provide your comments here. Thanks in advance. - Vivvt ( Talk)
|
Hey Tim, I intend to take this article for FAC. Would you mind offering some comments here? Thanks, — Vensatry (ping) 14:01, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you could give this a review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Marilyn Monroe/archive1? A core article if ever there was one which really needs a good review.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
This is a notification to all the recent PR contributors that the above article is now at FAC. Comments welcomed there.
Tim, I see you are working on VW – please keep in touch on this. Brianboulton ( talk) 23:08, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim Riley,
Re: "The Vortex" - Noel Coward
I hope this is the correct way of replying to your message to me. Thank you for your words.
I should explain that my feelings about the way the play, as described on the Wiki page, are strongly influenced by the fact that our (professional) theatre company is about to produce "The Vortex" in the Far East. However, some potential sponsors we have approached - not having read the script - have gone to look at the Wiki page and come away with the impression that this is a play about a man's addiction to cocaine and drug abuse in society in the 1920s. They have then turned us down: a major blow to us.
It is precisely because that entry and description of the play on the Wiki page is already a personal interpretation by someone that I changed it. It is not based on Coward's scipt. The play is first-and-foremost and principally about the mother's vanity and promiscuity and how that affects her relationship with her son, "Nicky". It most certainly is NOT principally about her "Nicky's" drug addiction to cocaine.
Indeed reading the play - essential- will show there is not one single mention of his being a cocaine user - not one. Indeed his use of drugs is only referred to twice in the script for a total of just eleven lines - in all. Hardly a major theme of the play.
This in not my interpretation of the play, Tim; it is based precisely and exactly on Coward's script. To say that the play is about Nicky's "severe cocaine addiction" or "drug abuse among the upper classes" (the latter statement being a complete nonsense) most certainly is a personal interpretation though and totally misleading.
So, I made changes because I believe the current page is someone's personal interpretation and that interpretation is wrong and damaging to producer's like ourselves who have difficult censorship rules in Asian countries to navigate. Most of all though the script confirms I am perfectly correct and it is the script that matters
I cant expect you to put-back my corrections I know but I do think someone official at Wiki should read the play and then decide for themselves based on Coward;s word's alone.
Thank you again for writing
Yours
John Faulkner www.britishtheatreplayhouse.com.sg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denningrichard ( talk • contribs) 05:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
HI Tim. I have nominated Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust for FLC at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust/archive1 and should be grateful if you have time to comment. Dudley Miles ( talk) 19:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Will try to look at it in a day or two! Funny coincidence but he was supposed to have been Frank Sinatra's favourite composer, and Sinatra was a classical music aficionado and liked a great range of composers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
I shall be absent all this week (Rome, gloat, gloat). Meanwhile I have completed my initial draft of the Bessie article. It is not formally reviewable yet – I have several footnotes to add, the lead image is unsatisfactory, the Appraisal needs expanding and the prose needs polishing and trimming, all of which I intend to do when I get back. I'd be very pleased, however, if you would give it an informal readthrough, and let ne know via my talkpage where you think the main weaknesses are?. Two quite surprising things I've found: she promoted very little if any parliamentary legislation during her 25 years in parliament, and in her last seven years she rarely even contributed to debates. She was apparently a good chairman of the Commons Catering Committee, though. Brianboulton ( talk) 08:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I hope your full visit to the Lake District did not turn out dry. Once your keyboard is no longer endangered by flooding, would you mind having a look at George Mason, at peer review? He spent a summer in Philadelphia once and did not like it very much. But it's for the new school tie and all that.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 11:51, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I cannot tell a lie. The Father of Our Country said "ignomy". My spellcheck doesn't like it either.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:39, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clifford Grey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page My Wife's Family. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Good evening Tim, how are you? I'm sorry to have taken so long to get to Vaughan Williams, but I got there in the end. Now here I am soliciting your thoughts—I have the "King of Con-men", Gregor MacGregor, up at peer review here. If you can find the time to look in I would appreciate it very much, as always. Thanks and I hope you're well as we approach Guy Fawkes' Night. — Cliftonian (talk) 21:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim Riley, a new pharaoh article is up as a good article candidate. I would be most grateful if you were interested in reviewing it some day. The article concerns Sheshi, who is paradoxically the best attested king of Egypt c. 1700 BC and "the one" about whom Egyptologists cannot agree on any single thing. The problem of understanding Sheshi's identity is deeply intertwined with that of piecing together the fall of the Middle Kingdom and the arrival of the famed Hyksos in Egypt. He may even have inspired the Biblical figure of Sheshai. In any case, thanks for your help and attention! Iry-Hor ( talk) 14:41, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Kailash29792 has nominated the article for FAC. Feel free to leave comments at its
FAC page.
—
Ssven2
Speak 2 me
09:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
If you want to, take a look at the article about Marie Serneholt which is this weeks TAFI article. Regards.-- BabbaQ ( talk) 20:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
[Template removed - causing technical problems with archiving] Labeling those who disagree with you in article layout discussions as "zealots" contravenes WP:ARBATC#All parties reminded, even if it may have been intended in a tongue-in-cheek away. Many editors are unaware that style discussions are subject to tighter civility restrictions, so I thought it sensible to inform you of this. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 04:11, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Back in February the article that I re-wrote on the TV sitcom Temperatures Rising was promoted to GA status. Since then the article has had some further refining, including a"once-over" by the Guild of Copy Editors. I have now submitted it again as an FAC. Since you supported it last time would you care to take a look at it once more? Jimknut ( talk) 17:15, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
|
–
As mentioned elsewhere, I am investigating GFH's "lost" Hamburg operas – not entirely lost, as it happens. I'm not making much use of Dent's superseded biography, but I need to cite a couple of statements. I only have access to the Gutenberg version which is unpaginated. I wonder if, when you're next in the BL, you could find the page refs for the following sections of the book, all from the first chapter:
I'd be much obliged if you can do this. Brianboulton ( talk) 16:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Bessie now ready for review comments. Any comments welcome. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your FA Ralph Vaughan Williams
I was again too late for reviewing, had to sing a piece first that we share, - thinking of recent events. DYK was up to the music. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
I wish Gerda spoke to me about music instead of infoboxes!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
In the new Midori Suzuki (soprano), could you please find out author and date of the Gramophone review? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Should we ignore the long-term pattern of bad behavior because you had a good experience? Are you able to understand and consider the experiences of others, even if they are at odds with your assessment? Or are you a solipsist, whose concern for the world ends with his physical body? Viriditas ( talk) 00:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
In recognition of your precious help in reviewing Ancient Egyptian pharaoh articles, with both precision and swiftness, I thereby award you this Barnstar of Diligence! Iry-Hor ( talk) 07:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC) |
Thank you so much, Iry-Hor! I am continually astonished not only by your scholarship but also by your skill in writing in a language not your own. I look forward to many more articles from you. Tim riley talk 21:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() | |
A Boy was Born |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I haven't yet received anything from you. Maybe you could just leave your comments on my talk page. Thanks for your interest.-- Ipigott ( talk) 16:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry to ask this, but my Handel researches have brought me to this important book. The parts that I need are in the attenuated online text but, infuriatingly, the online version is unpaginated. I am sure they do this to frustrate researchers and force them to buy the book, but this one costs over 200 quid! The page references I need are as follows:
These documents are all in the 1708 section. If on your next BL jaunt you could consult this tome and come up with some paging, I'd be very grateful (and £200 richer). Brianboulton ( talk) 20:22, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Can you help me to what this review says about a recording of Voces intimae (Sibelius) (or just add it there)? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Just to let you know, George Mason is [ FAC]. Many thanks for any comments. Hope you are well-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:55, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
The above article, to the PR of which you recently contributed, is now at FAC. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Can I interest you, perhaps, in the peer review for Wendell Willkie? He came to London once when the tourist trade was at an all-time low ... Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 16:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Tim and Wehwalt, I'll get to this one tonight. Really looking forward to it! You did the man justice. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() | The Cluestick is awarded to users who have demonstrated that they, in fact, have a clue. This Cluestick is awarded to Tim riley , someone 'gets' what's really going on, and keeps a vigilant eye... |
Thanks for putting in an unexpected word (above and beyond), in spite of all the shoutiness. Cheers!
THEPROMENADER
✎
✓
17:53, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Tim, we should really get William Sterndale Bennett at least up to GA for his 2016 bicentenary, no?-- Smerus ( talk) 13:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
|
I'm a bit ahead of myself, and I've finished the above, although I don't propose to put it to any formal review process until January when there should be more people about with time to look at articles. But I'd welcome a few informal comments on the talk page, if you have a moment. There is also the issue of the article's title (a move has been suggested on the talk page) and I'd like your views on that, too. (I've got another little music article on the go, but rest assured, from January onwards GBS will be my primary concern). Brianboulton ( talk) 21:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Dear Tim,
Good day, I would like to take this opportunity to hear from your inputs and/or your thoughts on the above article's FAC-worthiness. I understand that you are one of User:Brianboulton's close associates, and hence I felt that it is also appropriate on my part to invite you to co-appraise. I have heard from one of your associates, Wehwalt, whom I was led to understand was another associate of yours and Brian to co-appraise.
I welcome you to drop by at the FAC at any time, without pressure or obligations. See you and take care ! :) Mr Tan ( talk) 10:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
To anyone kind enough to watch this page: SchroCat, aided and abetted by me, has Albert Ketèlbey up for peer review. Visitors will be most welcome. Tim riley talk 15:40, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
And another not very well known English composer, William Sterndale Bennett, is also up for PR, where comments will be gratefully received. Tim riley talk 18:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
What better way to start the year than with a Tim Riley article. I've got the TFA down to 1539 characters. It needs to be around 1150, but I don't have a preference what to cut. Tis the season; would you care to do the carving? - Dank ( push to talk) 19:10, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your "valediction to the late John Webber, who edited WP as Viva-Verdi" and "knew a hundred times more about Verdi"
It's a great way to start a new musical year: "Tutto nel mondo è burla ... Tutti gabbati! / "Everything in the world is a jest ... ". -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Please don't edit war. On Albert Ketèlbey, your bold edit was reverted and at that point you should be heading for the talk page to discuss, not re-reverting. I'll be happy to match you revert for revert at this stage if you attempt to force your personal preferences onto the article. You are wrong, by the way, about WP:CITEVAR. Your edit removed properly sourced material, using the proper citation style for the article. Further attempts to remove good sources for spurious reasons are like to be treated as disruptive. Please take this warning in the spirit in which it is intended. -- RexxS ( talk) 18:32, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! |
![]() |
|
|
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 16:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Nothing fancy. Just a simple thank you for all your help on the Copland Connotations article and a wish for the best for you in 2016. Merry Christmas, Tim. Jonyungk ( talk) 16:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | |
Seasonal greetings for 2015, and best wishes for 2016. Here's to another year's productive editing, with peace, goodwill and friendship to all! Brianboulton ( talk) 17:31, 19 December 2015 (UTC) |
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! | ![]() |
|
A very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones, and a joyous and prosperous 2016.
|
Martinevans123
Santas Grotto ... sends you warmest wishes for a:
"Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda"
May the true spirit of Christmas bless you with warmth and peace! ... And
"Mele Kalikimaka" (Hawaiian Merry Christmas)!!
and to everyone else who has been kind enough to send greetings I send my warm reciprocations, and to those who haven't, I send happy greetings anyway. Tim riley talk 21:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clifford Curzon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Ireland. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Opinions? (Stalkers?) I'm wondering if I should always use "although" in AmEng articles per COMMONALITY. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:13, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tim riley: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Frankie talk 14:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC) [[
File:A book of country clouds and sunshine (1897), cropped.jpg|center|500px]]
Can we please discuss my edit and your subsequent reversion on the Noël Coward talk page? Seattle Jörg ( talk) 13:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Season's Greetings | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Poussin) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Benjamin Disraeli may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 22:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Alastair Sim may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 09:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Christmas! | |
Have a happy holiday season. May the year ahead be productive and happy. John ( talk) 18:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC) |
18Y |
Thank you to all who have made editing Wikipedia rewarding and enjoyable over the past ten years. Tim riley talk 12:10, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your reaching this milestone!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim. I have List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Bedfordshire at FLC. Comments gratefully received if you have the time. Happy new year. Dudley Miles ( talk) 22:34, 28 December 2015 (UTC)m
![]() | |
peace bell |
---|
Thank you for inspiration and support, including two excellent GA reviews in 2015, - thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:45, 31 December 2015 (UTC)