User talk:Brianboulton/Archive 1

I could use your help

On the Minna Bluff article, I was trying to put the coordinates you gave into correct wikipedia notation, but it's not clear if you meant 30 degrees east or 30 degrees west. If you have time, could you correct that? i kan reed 18:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 20 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ernest Wild, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, Daniel 08:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

did you know

...that Arnold Patrick Spencer-Smith, a Scottish curate ordained in 1910, had his wallet found in Captain Scott's Antarctic hut in 1999? by Brianboulton nom by Victuallers (talk) 14:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK? Sorry I though I left this msg ... I must have forgooten to save ? Victuallers (talk) 12:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 22 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Arnold Spencer-Smith, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little content on Woglinde

A tag has been placed on Woglinde, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Victao lopes (talk) 17:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Flosshilde

A tag has been placed on Flosshilde requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. RichardΩ6 12 18:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terra Nova Expedition

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Awarded for all of your hard work and research in bringing the Terra Nova Expedition article up to Good Article status. Congratulations! Dr. Cash (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The article is in very good shape. With a little more work polishing it off, it may be ready for WP:FAC fairly soon. Cheers! Dr. Cash (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAC removal

Hi, Brian. Please have a look at the instructions at WP:FAC regarding gaining support for previous nominations before initiating a second nom. This instruction is in place to assure that all FACs can receive adequate attention from reviewers. I've removed your second nom for now. I look forward to seeing more noms from you ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Brian. It's not a second nom for Terra Nova, it's that you have another nom (Ross Sea party) currently running. You're not supposed to add another until that has garnered support (usually meaning multiple supports, close to closing, no major issues). This is to assure that reviewers can give adequate attention to all noms (and also so that you won't be spread too thin if the first nom runs into trouble). If you give it just a few more days for Ross Sea party to get more feedback, you should be able to re-nom this one with no problem. Would you mind removing for now? Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Brian. I'm really sorry to put you in this position when you're doing such good work, but it should work out in only a few more days. (Don't forget to archive the peer review before approaching FAC.) I was traveling last month, and another nominator initiated a second FAC before the first one was addressed, no one realized, and you can see two significantly stalled FACs at the bottom of the current page from the same nominator; it's unfortunate that she is now dealing with two problems at once because no one noticed, and that's what we need to avoid. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Brian; with two supports, no opposes, and five days on Ross, it would be OK to put up Terra Nova now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Terra Nova copyedit

Hi -- I commented at the Terra Nova Expedition FAC that I felt the article needed a copyedit. I've done a draft copyedit in my sandbox, and this is a diff of the changes. I've done it in a sandbox because I wanted you to get a chance to look at them and see if you disagree with any of them; in a couple of cases I might have inadvertently changed your intended meaning. Let me know if this looks OK to you or if you have any concerns; once we're agreed I can apply the edits to the article (or you can if you like). Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth produced a map of the Endurance expedition for the Ernest Shackleton article. You might want to ask whether they can do one for this article too. Yomangani ^talk 09:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This might be PD - [1], as it is from NASA. Used on this page [2]. Yomangani ^talk 15:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://tiger.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/RossArea.jpg

I adapted this from a map in a copy of Scott's Journals. Something to start with anyway. Yomangani ^talk 14:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

Hi, I've finished as much as I can do at the moment on the article I have at GAN. I don't know the outcome yet, and I may have to zoom away at some point to make further changes. However, I'm interested in turning my attention to the Terra Nova map. Here's a technical question. I'd like to be able to show you half-finished things so that you can comment on them and I can make additions and corrections before uploading anything to the Commons. Can you suggest a handy way to do this? Finetooth (talk) 22:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Yomangani's map looks good to me, and the article seems quite wonderful. Finetooth (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brian, The map is done with three colours (black, red, blue) for the routes. I uploaded it to the Commons, and I found the base map at the NASA main site and put a link to it in the Commons description of the modified image. The base map is indeed in the public domain, and I added a public domain license as well as GFDL and CC-by-SA-3.0 licenses to the uploaded image. The image is Image:Discoveryfieldofwork.jpg. Please let me know if the map needs any further modifications. Best of luck with the rest of the article. Your work on the Antarctic articles is impressive. Finetooth (talk) 04:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Terra Nova

Brian

I saw your request for me to take a look at Discovery Expedition; sorry I've been slow getting back to you. I'm afraid Sandy just archived it, so it didn't get promoted this time around. I'll go ahead and copyedit it anyway, so when you renominate it I should be in a position to support, assuming it's the same high quality that the Terra Nova article was. I'll copyedit in place (rather than in a sandbox) this time unless I have any questions. Mike Christie (talk) 00:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It takes a while for GimmeBot to catch up, but this edit by SandyGeorgia is the archiving move. The discussion page will be updated to show it was not promoted when GimmeBot next runs. Anyway, the article is looking good so far; I suggest that when Ealdgyth says she would be ready to support, bring the article back to FAC. Normally one waits a bit before renominating but if Ealdgyth and I are planning to support I think you're OK, given she was the only opposer. Mike Christie (talk) 00:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm really not that far from supporting, honest! Didn't mean for the list to look THAT huge (ducks). It's a very good article, and I really enjoyed reading it. I'll be happy to support after a good copyedit. Ealdgyth | Talk 00:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brian, just saw your message; sure, I'll hold off. Let me know when you're ready for me to take another look. Mike Christie (talk) 00:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm through -- wasn't actually much to fix. Very nice work. One remaining point: in the second to last paragraph, you have two sentences starting with "But". I think this is occasionally OK, but two in one paragraph is a bit much. Could you find a way to rephrase one of them?

I'd say that if Ealdgyth is ready to support, you can renominate immediately and say that the only opposer has indicated her concerns are dealt with. I will also be supporting. Mike Christie (talk) 22:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a quick look at it shortly. (I have to look at Thoroughbred first, which we've been trying to get to GA for a while here...) I doubt they'll be any issues, given Mike's copyediting skills! Ealdgyth | Talk 00:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few very small changes (mostly stray periods, missing spaces, etc.) The only even semi-interesting change was formatting on the external links so that they weren't bald URLs. The WP:MOS wants pretty formatted links, so I was bold and gave them titles. Feel free to change them to something else, but I didn't want someone screaming about MOS breaches for that. It looks VERY good, and the prose is MUCH improved! I whole-heartedly support. Ealdgyth | Talk 01:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discovery Expedition

Do you have access to JSTOR? Am finding some articles (including esp. book reviews, alas) that seem to have some useful info and images. Could email them to you, if you email me and say you want them (can't send attachments via Wikipedia email). Ling.Nut (talk) 15:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scott v Shackleton

Are his letters to the RGS published anywhere? I've never found the journal entries particularly convincing - Shackleton isn't the only one that falls foul of Scott's pen. Yomangani ^talk 17:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read the Riffenburgh book, but the others always seemed to me to be perfectly "spinnable" in either direction. A bit of professional rivalry away from the Antarctic, a bit of pressure in Antarctic (Fiennes and Stroud were planning to kill each other, so it obviously doesn't make for the best relations). Anyway, I'll await your Nimrod article, complete I hope with the surprise packages left for Scott in the Discovery Hut. Yomangani ^talk 18:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And congrats to you

Well done! When I get back from the horse show, I'll be glad to look over anything you want to have outside eyes on. (Be back the 28th or so) Ealdgyth - Talk 01:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed, congratulations to you as well! You were a pleasure to work with - I winced a bit every time I came up with a new list of issues, but you were unfailingly gracious about it. It is FACs like this one that convince me it's worth coming back for more. Thank you. Maralia (talk) 20:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discovery Expedition (congrats!)

Good on you! :-) Ling.Nut (talk) 00:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA

I'm afraid I never go near it; it always seemed a pointless halfway house to me, and though I suspect it has improved I haven't bothered looking at it again. Anyway, for what help it may be, I suspect:

The edit summary "Passed [[Article Name]]" should go on the GA nominations page when you remove the passed article, and I doubt the quote marks are significant.
You should replace {{GAN}} on the article talk page with {{GA|~~~~~}}, but if you are feeling ambitious you can instead replace it with {{GA|~~~~~|oldid=nnnnnn|topic=topic name}}, replacing nnnnnn with the id of the passing version (go to the history tab for the article, click on the date link for the latest version, then copy the oldid number from the url and paste that in in place of nnnnnn) and the topic name with the appropriate abbreviation for the category from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Good_articles/Uncategorized_Good_articles_task_force#Categories
The edit summary for the talk page of the article you are passing. Just include the letters GA somewhere in the edit summary when you replace the template to identify the edit as the point at which it was passed GA
I think the reviews are normally left on the article talk page under a heading of "GA review" or something similar.

Let me know if you have problems and I'll try and fix it for you. Yomangani ^talk 00:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Owen Dodd

(This is being posted on the article's talk page as well as on the reviewer's talk page.) As the one who started this article, I appreciate your taking the time to review it. I was flattered that the article was nominated for GA status. I will try to address your questions, although it is difficult to find verifiable sources for the level of detail you are asking about. Having been involved in some GA reviews previously, I would be curious how you rate the article using the six criteria in Wikipedia:Good article criteria. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 00:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition

Hi, Brian
Are you already able to tell when you'll be finished with this article? I just begun to translate it to German, but then I remarked that you're still on it... btw, your articles are really good, my translated version of Terra Nova Expedition has recently been awarded. ;-). Greetings--RedSolution (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Crean

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		Awarded to Brianboulton for your insightful and thorough review of Tom Crean, which helped bring it to GA status! Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Antarctica gaining speed

Dear sir,

I saw that you have a subject matter interest in Antarctica. I used one of your featured articles (Discovery Expedition) for the new English language Portal:Antarctica. Feel free to drop by the portal, if interested.

Ictionary (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Scott

How can I resist an appeal to ponies in the Antarctic? (Even though I know they get eaten in the end...) I'll try to get over there tonight... Still have a couple of other things to take care of first, but I promise, it's on my list! Ealdgyth - Talk 22:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC) And now... a lonely Anglo-Saxon Archbishop is crying out to you for you to come and visit....Ealdgyth - Talk 22:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL.. wrong archbishop. Augustine of Canterbury is up for FAC (grins) And thanks for catching that wikilink to Emma... gah! Who the HECK put THAT wikilink in while I was out of town? I hate drive-by wikilinkers... they always get it wrong. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]