User talk:Jonyungk/Archive5

Gustav Mahler is 150 on 7 July

Are you interested in Mahler? If so, please see my note on the article's talkpage, re the 150th anniversary. Brianboulton (talk) 14:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Edward Said

Thank you so much, Jonyungk, for the edits you made on the page. I was stressing out today, and you took a load off my mind. Peace.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Images

It is seems to me like you have an excellent understanding of research, sources, and writing, but are not yet very familiar with the exciting world of image copyright! :) There are two dispatches that are a very good introduction to the subject: free images and non-free images. Taking some time to read these will help you figure out what information an image needs to be copyright compliant. Awadewit (talk) 18:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

My disinterest in two articles

In my efforts to be direct and honest, I admit that every time I try to read the articles you've suggested (Tchaikovsky and the Five, and Tchaikovsky and the Belayev Circle), I find them visually pleasing, but I have no interest in the text. I struggled to discern whether this is because they seem like article that could be dealt with respectively on the articles "Tchaikovsky", "the Five" and "the Belayev Circle", or whether I simply am not as interested in the topic as you. I should note that I am more interested in the "Nadezhda von Meck" aspect of Tchaikovsky's life, and the nature of Tchaikovsky's music itself, while I tend to remain outside of the world of music politics which was happening in Russia at the time in question. Thus, you have my opinion. Respectfully, and with blessings of peace, love and knowledge, Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 03:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

With that said, the only thing within the article I could see that needs improving upon is the caption under the image of Waterhouse's "Miranda" which I think could be clearer in its intented meaning that Tchaikovsky intended his "Tempest" to focus on the Shakespearean Miranda and not the Waterhouse representation. Lame advice, I shamefully admit, but it did stand out to me.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 03:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Bring me the head of Rimsky-Korsakov?

• 
  Repin crop
• 
  Serow crop
• 
  Elson's book 1915

I didn't know R-K wrote the opera Salome ;-) I will crop both the color portraits and post them on Commons so you can see them and pick which one you like best. I also found an OK black and white R-K portrait in an old book online and will grab that. May take me a day. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

How are these? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Added the black and white portrait from Elson's 1915 book above too - the scan distorted the left side of the oval a bit. I forgot about Borodin's Salome - thanks. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

PS The cough syrup joke had me laughing out loud. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 06:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I just so happen to be fairly fluent in German, so I can try to translate it. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 06:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, I translated all the stuff in German to English. I am near-fluent in two languages: German and English. My mother tongue is Pig Latin ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 06:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Ou-yay are-ay ery-vay elcome-way, uhrfisch-Ray _><>°^° 06:45, 9 anuary-Jay 2010 (UTC-ay)

Congratulations!

Woo-hoo! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

A question regarding article ratings

Hello, Jonyungk. I am wondering now that Edward Said is a Good Article", what is the process to get its rating changed to "A"? Isn't the "A" rating decided by random editors, in which case I could simply change its rating now, if I thought it so deserved?--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 02:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov

Hi, I found a giant list of his works here. Everything seems to be public domain (clearly labeled). Most of the pieces have a MID file, which can be uploaded to Commons, no conversion necessary. Not as good as a recording in some way, but better than nothing I guess. You can also look for ogg files here, but it's kinda unsorted... --Magnus Manske (talk) 20:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE: Found some more :-) --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE 2: One more. --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Images in Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov

I would look at all the books you have on him and see what images are used in those - if nothing else, an image can be sourced to the book. I have tried looking online for some of them and will keep looking. I looked at his My Musical Life, but it only has a frontispiece image. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it does not seem as if she is the wife of Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov. This webpage is not a WP:RS but says she was his aunt. I wondered if she might be a wife of his older brother. I think that the photo of his real wife would be fine as fair use, if no free version can be found. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Leonard Harrison2.jpg is an example of a fair use photo where we only know the source, not the date or author. Might be a useful model if Fair use is needed for her photo - we can almost certainly find a source. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I found and added the source earlier diff ;-), thanks for adding the fair use rationale. WIth fair use there has to be a non-free license, so I switched it to {{Non-free historic image}}. I am still looking for a source for the young R-K picture. Do you want me to look for the Conservatory too? I like the color photo in there now. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I found a picture of Nikolai R-K as a boy cadet at this website. The fourth image under the "The second drawing-room" heading is an image of R-K as a cadet. From reading the article, I assume this means before 1863 (since he graduated in 1862) and to me he looks much younger. I think either this or the other naval photo of him (assuming we can find a source) or the photo of his brother could be used as fair use (some are probably old enough to be PD). Your call on which to use, but so far the new image has the best source. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I found a better source (and a larger version) of File:Rimsky-Korsakov 1866.jpg online - have uploaded the larger version and updated the file infor too. Do you want me to upload the image from the house museum? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:45, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Victorianism Parsifal Rembrandt Lev Ivanov George Saint Petersburg Conservatory Symphony No. 3 (Mendelssohn) Swan Lake Verona Requiem Votkinsk Hanns Jelinek Tosca Moscow Conservatory Capriccio (music) Art song Great Emigration Java Romance (music)

Cleanup Mikhail Lermontov William Wordsworth The Nutcracker Merge Daphne Gothic Revival architecture Eastern world Add Sources Juliusz Słowacki A Life for the Tsar Piano concerto Wikify Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades James Van Allen Private university Expand Alexander Pushkin Boris Godunov (opera) Orchestration

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Category for deletion: Your opinion needed

There is a category which is being discussed for deletion which I see great use in. It is: Category:Musicians who have served in the military. I wonder if you would check it out, and offer your opinion, either way, "Keep" or "Delete", here. (I hope you'll let me know whether you find this request inappropriate. Cheers!)--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The decision of the discussion was "delete". Thanks for contributing. By the way, did you ever see my response to your Edward Said question?--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 09:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Images in Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov

Hi Jongyungk. Google is the way to go unless you have a library of old books on hand. I said this before: use Google Books with the added parameter "date:1800-1922" to your search terms. Any images found in those books could at the minimum be uploaded to Wikipedia on the basis of {{PD-1923}}. That is the most basic of my checks and searches for PD images. If the basic method does not turn up results, using other search terms (related to the image or the subject) could help. More exhaustive methods would involve greater time and effort on Google (not just the Books section): you have to read through piles of text found by Google. Try using the original language at times (e.g. German text, Cyrillic, etc). That is why image checking can be tiring stuff. Furthermore, beware of sites that copy information from Wikipedia (check the dates or acknowledgments). Jappalang (talk) 01:27, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Here is a caricature of the Five (plus the Purgold sisters) published in 1871, here is a different picture of her but it is in French, so I am not sure what it says. Wait I found the caricature of the Five plus the Purgold sisters in German here. Since it is art and we know the publication date, it is PD. Not the greatest picture of her... Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words at the FAC, which I had seen but neglected to thank you for. If worse comes to worse, I have cropped the caricature so that there could be a small illustration of Mr and Mrs R-K in the article (can't spell her first name). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Tchaikovsky images

I would read WP:NFCC - since both Bob and his wife are discussed at length in the article, I think images of both would be justified under fair use. I do not see what the image at Cambridge adds to the reader's undertanding (since we already know what Tchaikovsky looked like), so I doubt it would be OK. Not sure on the Commons transfer issue. I think I would ask Jappalang or someone else who knows a lot about image licenses. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I was in a bit of a hurry when I wrote the above - let me look at these more closely. If one goes by life of the photographer plus 70 years (which is PD-old on Commons), then assuming the photographer was 20 years old in 1877 and that the photographer lived to age 80, it has still been long enough for the image of him and his wife to be PD-old. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I checked the Tchaikovsky article and it has no fair use media in it now, so I think two fair use photos (which have a good chance of being PD-old) would be OK, especially since they illustrate what two of the more important people in his life (wife and nephew / lover?) looked like. I would also add that since the images show each with Tchaikovsky they give some idea of the relation between him and the other person (very stiff / posed with her, more relaxed with him). If they are fair use, they would have to be hosted here on Wikipedia and not on Commons. SInce the PD-old argument did not pass muster at FAC, I would just go for Fair use. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not too certain of that. Unless there is some particular display of the relationship between the subjects in the photos that had been discussed by critical sources, placing the photos in the article could be decoration (the relationship between them can be described in text). This is particularly so when the article's subject is not "Tchaikovsky and <insert name here>", but "Tchaikovsky" (alone). Jappalang (talk) 04:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The photos are illustrating two people; they do not illustrate the relationship between them unless sources point the pictures out as evidence of their relationship. For fair use, sources would have to discuss the content in those pictures to lend them contextual signficance in my view. Jappalang (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Basically, if sources comment on the photos, specifically stating such stuff as "note the poses he and Bob hold; they are similar and suggest a relationship that ..." or "the antagonism between the composer and his erstwhile wife is evident in this portrait. Note their expression, see the ..." and such. Without such commentary, the photos serve illustrative purposes (showing two persons) instead of lending contextual significance (thanks to the commentary) or helping to show what words cannot express. Jappalang (talk) 06:34, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Such commentary should be worked into the article in its relevant section(s) and sourced accordingly. Usually, such a section is thematical, e.g. Sexual inclinations, marital relationship, etc. Jappalang (talk) 07:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Jappalang is much more knowledgable on Fair Use than I am, but here goes my thoughts. It would have to be a book that uses the photo (obviously). I assume the book would also have to discuss the relationship in question in general terms. I then think that any sort of commentary on the image, including the descriptive text would count - for example, if the caption for the honeymoon photo said something like "Although this is a formal portrait, Tchaikovsky and his wife are especially stiff and do not look at each other...". Another possibility would be to write to the author of the book who had the honeymoon picture in his personal collection and ask if 1) he has any more information on it (photographer, copyright status, whatever) and 2) if he owns the photo, would he consider releasing it for the Wikipedia article under a free license (this could be in a small format, for example, only 250 pixels wide). I also wonder if any websites or journal articles that meet WP:RS discuss the images? Sorry not to have better ideas, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. Since the honeymoon picture was taken in 1877 (133 years ago), I would ask Jappalang when it is safe to assume life of the photgrapher plus 70 years for PD-old. I also know sometimes firms will claim copyright on images that are actually PD, not sure with the whole Imperial Russia, USSR, Russia legal status too. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

(out) Yes, I can see where that is a potential problem. By the way, I looked at all the images in the Tchaikovsky's Letters book on Google Books and none of them include the wife or Bob images. I also finally heard back from Naxos on the color Balakirev image and they said they did not know its source. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

There is the commons:Template:Anonymous-EU for European images that verifiably (as far as any sources that published it) has no authorship claims; the terms are 70 years since publication. Inevitably this means that the sources (over the years) that published it must have never credited the photo to its author, or explicitly state that it has no known copyright owner. For Bob and Piotr's photo, try investigating its French photographer Von Brosch in libraries (I could not find any useful information on the web). On fair use grounds to use these photos, I am a bit on the stricter side (the "contextual significance" criterion can be subjective). I am sorry I cannot be of greater help but my work calls for my attention for this period, reducing the time I can spend on this project. Jappalang (talk) 03:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good possibility. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Only 29 years before they can be used ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: the Poznansky bit

I wasn't sure of the proper place to voice my concern, whether here or on the Tchaikovsky Talk page. I hope I not giving you more of a headache, as I know you've been doing your best for the images on that page.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Rimsky-Korsakov PR

Looks like Awadewit covered everything I wanted to say about prose, so I think I'm done. Nice work! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 23:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Barnstar of High Culture
		Your carefully researched and meticulously written article on Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov have made it one of Wikipedia's best - thanks for your dedication! We need more editors like you. Awadewit (talk) 02:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Images

Since there is no source or other information for File:Mravina as Oksana 1895.jpg it is hard to imagine easily proving that it is free. Still, you have to wonder the source of all these problematic images. I wonder if the uploader had a Russian / Soviet book with lots of photos or perhaps a collection of postcards? It would be really nice to know where these all came from - I did a quick Google images search, but did not find anyhting that looked like it was not just a copy of this version. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Is email this user emabled for the account? He might still check that email address... Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The site is a Wikipedia mirror - see here. Sorry the uploader is out of contact. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Might be worth asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia if anyone there knows the source for some images. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:20, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, at least they are spreading your good work here even further ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:16, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Congratualtions

Congrats! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

PS I will get to the peer review in a day or two.

Congrats for the new FA!! It will be soon translated, I promise you! I have enjoyed reading it, but I think I'll enjoy more to translate it. Which is your new project now? Or you need a little wikibreak for now? Bye! OboeCrack (talk) 23:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Getting images off PDFs

I also use Windows and usually use Internet Explorer (or Mozilla Firefox), so I think this should work for you too. I get the image as big as I can on the screen first, but try very hard to keep it all on the screen. I often maximize the size of the window on my screen with F11 in IE (Full Screen, also under Tools in IE 8). I capture the image using Print Screen, which involves pressing the Control (Ctrl) and Print Screen (Prnt Scrn) buttons simultaneously. I then paste the image into MS Paint or Paint.NET using control V, and crop it and try to clean it up as needed (Paint.NET lets you rotate nicely). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Looking good! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I have not found the Rachmaninoff image yet, but I did find this looking at Google images. Will keep looking, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, good find. I would use the better resolution version, but include a link to the one I found to establish that it is free (published before 1923). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Belyayaev peer review

I am working on this, though I have a lot of distraction at the moment. I have some particular suggestions relating to the lead, and I hope to post these tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 00:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Glad my comments were useful - knowing it was arearranged makes sense in retrospect. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You do very good work - no need to beat yourself up (that's what FAC and PR are for ;-) ). I know it is often easier for me to see my faults and those in my own work than it is to see the good I do, and it sounds like you sometimes feel the same way. That's OK, just don't lose sight of all the good you do in the process.

One of the things I really like about Wikipedia is how easy it is for people to work together here. I like that I don't have to do everything by myself, others can and do help, and I am glad to return the favor. I have read an awful lot of peer reviews and no one's articles come to PR perfect (or to FAC). Writing is hard work and it almost always helps to have someone else read what we write to point out things we are too close to see clearly or at all. I suspect that the same feeling that your work could be better before PR is what makes you take such care and do such good work in the first place - sometimes our strengths and our weaknesses are two sides of the same coin.

I am too tired and need to rest, but I think you need a laugh and this vandalism has had me chuckling off and on for over an hour (your mileage may vary) [1]. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Glad you thought it was funny too. Everybody has different gifts - I keep meaning to rewrite / improve Johnny Appleseed but have little experience writing biographies. Eeek. Take care, and thanks for all you do, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Re:Kate Winslet

I'm sorry you had to witness that display of Wiki-hostility, Jonyungk. There's some kind of wild, almost rabid protection instinct over one to three editors on that article. They won't let me get a word in. Knowing me, I'm probably the cause of the attitude. Luckily though, the article's not half-bad, and so, I don't really stake any emotion on their accepting my perspective. I found your comment sweetly encouraging. Thanks, friend.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 08:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Davydov

I worked on the "sexuality" section of the Tchaikovsky article. I did find the mentions of Davydov a bit overbearing and whittled it down some. I hope I didn't cut something vital. Also, I wonder what you think of my including Poznansky's book title in the text. I'm sure my edits weren't perfect, but hopefully you'll find an improvement or two among them. Cheers, Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 17:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Cheers!

		The Music Barnstar
		I deeply aprecciate all your work and dedication to the project, specially with such interesting articles. I'd like to translate them all as a symbol of recognition. Thank you Jonyungk! OboeCrack (talk) 15:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Waterfalls

Thanks so much for your very kind words - I am glad you like the article and am also quite pleased with how it turned out. I think that part of the article's success is the topic, as it is really an amazing park and a beautiful place to hike. I had a lot of fun "working" on the article and kept finding excuses to go back for more pictures. ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

John Barbirolli

Hello, Jonyungk. We had a brief exchange at the FA stage of Tchaikovsky and The Five. I wonder if you could find time to look at the Barbirolli article, which I've put forward for peer review? Most grateful if you could fit it in. - Tim riley (talk) 13:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

That's excellent! Thank you so much - full of the most helpful comments. I'll go through them soonest. - Tim riley (talk) 12:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

And now have, and acted on them. I am indebted to you, Jonyungk. - Tim riley (talk) 19:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky and the Belyayev circle and image

St. Petersburg Conservatory, published in the US in 1910

• I like the lead much better now - would it read better here as By contrast, the fortunes of the nationalistic group of composers known as The Five, which preceded the Belyayev circle, had waned, and the group had long since dispersed;...
• Direct quotes in the lead need a ref per WP:LEAD and WP:MOSQUOTE
• Would Over the long term, Tchaikovsky's influence over the Belyayev composers was not so great. read better as Over the long term, Tchaikovsky's influence over the Belyayev composers was not as great.
• I found a free image of the St. Petersburg Conservatory published in the US in 1910 to add to the article if you'd like. I forgot to say before, that making the composite images was very useful practice for the waterfalls composite. No experience in life is wasted ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Glad the image was useful and I like the lead much better. Thank goodness for Ilya Repin - here is a portrait he did of Balakirev (but in a group). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
    • Wow, that was fast - glad you liked it. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

(out) Since the point is cited to Taruskin, would it read better as something like "Accoring to music historian Taruskin, ..."? It seems like a valid point to me, especially since it is referenced, so maybe making clearer who says it would be better? There are some things that seem more POV when unattributed, but are OK from a valid source. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Glad to know I caught a typo. Unless it is a full sentence, I just assume that logical quotation is needed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - will re-read it carefully tomorrow and weigh in on the FAC then. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Glad it has all worked out - thanks for the notice Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Composite images

Very nicely done in John Barbirolli. The lead image for Jay Pritzker Pavilion is also a composite I put together. There are color images of all of the Five now (thank you Ilya Repin) - not sure if it would be useful to try a color composite there? I think it would have to be the same color images of Tchaikovsky and Rimsky-Korsoakov as are already in the Belyayev (sp?) circle composite. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I actually liked the single lead image for the pavilion better, but the composite was a FAC request and I have come to like it more as time has passed. I am glad you clarified that Balakirev is on the left side - I thought that that looked much more like him than did the person in the middle. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Rimsky-Korsakov TFA

Yes, the TFA/R process can be a bit intimidating - you can at least add it to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending for now, which is linked on the talk page for WP:TFA/R and at least makes others aware (such as Raul, who ultimately makes the final decision about TFAs). Sorry to be slow in replying, was busy in real life. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on my talk page. Real life seems to have taken over for a bit, but I intend to come back and suggest further improvements if I can think of any. They'll all be style and copy suggestions, because the article seems pretty comprehensive. Well done for getting it featured - I know the FAC process can be frustrating! Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 21:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

There, I got to the end! I hope you think the rest of my edits were improvements - mostly merely phrasing for clarity and avoidance of repetitive vocabulary. I think the article's content and structure are excellent. Looks to have good support for front-page featuring in March. --RobertG ♬ talk 15:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the generous tribute...

Thank you for the kind words about my recent Arctic story. However, I'm back in the music game now, and any moment you will see Il ritorno d'Ulisse in patria at peer review. I'd be pleased to have your views, no punches pulled. It's my final project before I launch into the Great Sea of Mahler, with who knows what result. Brianboulton (talk) 01:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Il ritorno is now at peer review Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)