User talk:Brianboulton/Archive5

Proserpine (play)

Thanks for a wonderful GA review! I thoroughly enjoyed responding to your comments. You did an excellent job of picking up where I wasn't altering my language enough for the general reader. There are still some outstanding issues with the article (some bits I have to look up in books, etc.), but we can probably start going over your list now. Awadewit (talk) 15:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Responded again. Awadewit (talk) 01:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Finished. Awadewit (talk) 17:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

FA Successes

Hey Brian, thanks. Congrats to you too for the excellent SNAE. Likewise glad to play a small part in its promotion, though you should know that your double PR of GA in the UK fixed things I would never have spotted, and which would surely have earned the dreaded "find a good copyeditor" torpedo-comment at FAC. Off to hone my PR and CE skills for a while now, then maybe enough time will have passed to heal some wounds and fix Air transport and the environment (United Kingdom). --FactotEm (talk) 09:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I replied to your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SummerSlam (2003). Thank You!--S_RX 13:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Félix Houphouët-Boigny

I was wondering if you might consider reviewing this article for GAC. I am coordinating the FA-Team mission, which is trying to work it up to featured status. It was translated from French and has undergone some major reorganization. A detailed review would help the editors a lot. I have already given a peer review and done some copyediting, but we would appreciate all the reviews that we can get! (As a side note, I found the article very interesting.) Awadewit (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Tom Crean

Hi Brian, I got your note on my talk page. I'm getting back to wikipedia, reading Castro's biography and going to contribute to some articles surrounding that. Do you have any suggestions on how to get Tom Crean to FA status? Do you think it's just cleaning up wording and organisation, or is there more content needed? Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• I won't be around the next week or so, but I'll be able to give it some attention the last week of August or beginning of Sept... Zatoichi26 (talk) 21:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Brian, I just discovered To-Do lists, so I added one to Tom Crean with some initial suggestions. Should help us focus our effort. I see from your user page you've been very busy, where do you find all the time? :) Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Brian: I like your paragraph in the Terra Nova section. I just made one spelling correction but left the rest. In the Endurance section, I am thinking of changing "The journey to South Georgia took 17 days, in what navigator Frank Worsley described as mountainous gales and swell." to "... 17 days, in heavy seas, gales and snow squalls", which I can cite from p 148 of Caroline Alexander's book "The Endurance". I could not find the citation in that book for Frank Worsley calling the sea/weather "mountainous gales and swell". Do you know where that comes from? I like that description, if we can cite it. If not what do you think of my proposed change? Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Agreed about "mountainous gales"... how about re-writing as: "The journey to South Georgia took 17 days through gales and snow squalls, in heavy seas which navigator Frank Worsley described as a "mountainous westerly swell". The sentence can cite Shackleton's Boat Journey. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI

I saw this thread while I was there posting something else, and I noticed that it didn't appear that anyone had consulted you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Sandy! Should have taken the time to look into the article edit histories! Carcharoth (talk) 23:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Polar exploration and Arctic stuff

Hi Brian. Thanks for the note on my talk page. I knew there had to be someone churning out all that great featured content! :-) Your plans for a smaller featured topic on Antarctic Heroic Age British exploration make a great deal of sense, and you are right, the topic of polar exploration is too broad for a featured topic. I'm now considering setting up Portal:Arctic and Wikipedia:WikiProject Arctic (to match the Antarctic equivalents at Portal:Antarctica and Wikipedia:WikiProject Antarctica). I think there are easily enough articles and other materials (eg. pictures) to sustain something like that. For now, would you have any time to look at List of Arctic expeditions? I started it based on List of Antarctic expeditions, but there are differences that make it more difficult to cover this topic in the same way (more history; an ocean surrounded by land instead of land surrounded by ocean; and so on), but I think some sort of timeline is needed. Do you know much about the Arctic, or are you more involved in the history of Antarctic exploration? I noticed Farthest South. Is there no real equivalent for Farthest North? Ah, from previewing this, I see there is an article on that! Fascinating. So if the claims of Cook and Peary are not now generally believed, who got there first after them? Did people keep trying or not? I see North Pole says Soviets in 1948! Polar exploration says 1952 (aircraft) and 1968 (snowmobile). I suppose you already know of this and this, but it is the first I've read of this. Anyway, any help or advice would be appreciated. Oh, one more thing: do you think a "polar exploration" portal might be possible at some point? The "exploration" and "history" stuff is quite easily separated out from the "geography" and "flora and fauna" articles. Carcharoth (talk) 00:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Replied on my talk page. Carcharoth (talk) 17:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

This FAC, which you commented on, has been restarted.

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SummerSlam (2003).S_RX 18:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Well this was the purpose of the restart to avoid the long discussions and wars, this is to reiterate the votes.--S_RX 18:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

William de St-Calais

You happy with the status of the CE on this? If so, it'll go up on FAC within the next 24 hours. I'm finally home! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Brian, it's been put up. I really appreciate you doing the copyediting! Ealdgyth - Talk 13:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Pat Nixon

Brian, I've responded to you at the Pat Nixon FAC. I just wanted to let you know that you have been such an asset to the article, as well as a huge help both in the peer review and the FAC, and I thank you. Best as always, Happyme22 (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Southern Cross Expedition

Hi Brian. I'd be delighted to look it over - although I'm not sure how much help I'll be. Give me 24-hours and I'll report back. (Changed name cos, when I joined Wikipedia, I just used the name I use on eBay! Gave it no thought - and consequently grew to really hate it! My days as a 'lass' are sadly well behind me!! So... decided on the name of a flower instead).-- Myosotis Scorpioides 15:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Just started taking a look - seems a great little article! The disambiguation checker suggests these words need a quick dabbing: Bluff, Mount Terror, Possession Island, Sami and Sealing.-- Myosotis Scorpioides 17:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Proserpine (play)

Proserpine is up for FAC and you have been invoked - would you mind taking a quick look at a sentence that has been causing trouble? Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 21:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Image

Hi, can you please provide a suggestion regarding the Image:German anti-smoking ad.jpeg and Image:AntiSmokingNaziGermany.jpg in the article Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany. If the images are appropriate or not. Since you have many FAs, I am asking you. You can read the discussion in talk page. Talk:Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany#Consensus_for_Image:AntiSmokingNaziGermany.jpg. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Satellite image

I'd be glad to help if I can. At first glance, it looks like a straightforward job, and the NASA license looks fine this time. I want to be sure I've got the correct bay before I start. I see two bays along the left side of the north end of the island. The northernmost one is smaller than the next one to the south. Which of these two should get the letters? Finetooth (talk) 18:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for the second map for reference. I'll put in three letters. I should be able to make these modifications and upload the revised version later today. I'll let you know when it's up. Finetooth (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

It's posted to the Commons as Image:South Georgia NASA.map.png. Please let me know if you need modifications; the three letters were easy to add. I didn't ask before, but I'm wondering which article(s) the map is meant for. Finetooth (talk) 23:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The image is great, thank you so much. The article in question is Voyage of the James Caird, which is going through FAC at the moment. You may care to take a look, (and even leave a comment!) At present I am using the line map which I showed you, but I think the satellite image, with a full explanatory caption, may be better. If I don't use it here, it will definitely go into the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition article, which I am preparing as the leading article for a featured topic. Brianboulton (talk) 23:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

PR

I would be glad to take a look and make some comments in the next day or so. I felt bad when I took it off the PR backlog, but it had enough comments (albeit only on refs and images). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Wesley College, Melbourne

Your feedback re the GA nomination is valuable and helpful, and I have begun attending to the article in regards to prose and balance of history versus other elements. Having contributed most of the history content, I was aware at the time that I was relying heavily on the most recent school history, which although written "independently" by a credentialled historian, was nevertheless initiated (I think) or at the very least endorsed by the school. I was comfortable in relying on it however to the extent that it does provide quite a "warts and all" commentary, thus at least suggesting it has a sense of balance and NPOV. Overriding this however has been the lack of reliable alternative sources. Most others (where they exist at all) come from the school or from less reliable sources some of which are still connected in some way with the school. On balance I took the view that notable elements of the school history should still appear even if the source provided wasn't as "pure" as it could be. I also note that the Aquinas College, Perth article which you suggest as a useful model has no less than 21 references to a similar school history which appears at least according to this to perhaps have been initiated by that school. Your thoughts? Murtoa (talk) 06:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the prompt feedback. Interestingly, reporting on school standards is a current point of debate in Australia - the relatively new Rudd government is planning into introduce nationwide league tables along the lines you suggest. But there's not much in that vein at time of writing. Regarding the history, the suggestion to consult biographies is a sound one (notwithstanding it could entail many hours of labour!) I appreciate the title of the most recent history of Wesley is unhelpful for those seeking neutral references, although hopefully this concern is partially mitigated by the sections I have referenced which hopefully do come through in the article as not unduly singing Wesley's praises. The largely unsourced or directly school-sourced sections in the article are a concern and have been a constant source of debate regarding their inclusion. Your feedback could be helpful in resolving these areas, but I fear not within the next seven days! Thanks again. Murtoa (talk) 10:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, not sure if you were wanting an update here or at the GA review. There's been a fair attempt to address the concerns expressed in the review. There's been a deal of tidying - prose, references and so on. Possibly the outstanding weaker area is finding non-school references for some of the material particularly in the latter part of the article. In some sections this has been addressed by actually removing material. Regarding the multiple references to the Lemon book in the History section, I think this may be a longer term task, although on balance I regard it as a legitimate if not perfect source. Murtoa (talk) 22:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
• Happy for you to proceed now with review. This GA process is new to me and certainly I don't feel all deficiencies with the article have been perfectly addressed, but I don't think another couple of days will make much difference. Keen for the feedback! Thanks Murtoa (talk) 01:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Firstly Brianboulton thanks for your comments and suggestions, I like Murtoa have had no experience in the GA review process, I agree with Murtoa that there has been a fair attempt to address the concerns expressed in your review. The article has been tidy up and the prose has been adjusted, references have been adjusted, changed and added. I would like to stress the fact that Lemon's book: A Great Australian School: Wesley College is an independent book and has some affiliations with the College but not many. We would like to hear from you again, if you and the other contributors dont mind, can you please review it again and provide us with some more suggestions. Thank Your for your efforts! CheersSheepunderscore (talk) 07:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Just clarifying that although Lemon's history of Wesley is a professional and comprehensive work by a credentialled historian, it cannot be considered independent of the school or without affiliation. Indeed the reference here suggests it was probably commissioned by the school. Nonetheless, my previous comments around being comfortable quoting from it stand. Murtoa (talk) 08:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks so much for the comprehensive review. All good feedback and helpful pointers for further action. Cheers. Murtoa (talk) 22:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Brianboulton, if you dont mind, we have done most of the things suggested (please refer to [1]) by you on the comprehensive report, if you can can yo please have a look again unofficially and tell us what else needs to be done. Thank You for your tirelss efforts!!!!! Sheepunderscore (talk) 10:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Will do, as soon as I can. I'm going away on 12th & will try and take a look before then. Brianboulton (talk) 10:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• Might be getting close to having it reassessed but would welcome your view. Cheers Murtoa (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the further feedback. Murtoa (talk) 12:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Brianboulton. You have new messages at Sheepunderscore's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Category:Lists of operas by composer

Hi. Just a note to say I have started this category. Best. --Kleinzach 09:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Escape from New York/GA1

Gary King (talk) 23:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Richard Nixon GAN

I'll be happy to take a look at the Souther Cross Expedition article. As for Richard Nixon, I did not nominate the article for GA. That was User:Sdornan, who has not edited the article but four times. I do not think the Richard Nixon article is ready for GA, as there are just too many uncited statements and the prose needs work. I contacted Sdornan and asked him to withdraw the GAN, but he has not gotten back to me. Happyme22 (talk) 17:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway FAC

You were helpful enough to leave comments when this article was nominated for featured article status back in June. I have made further improvements and have renominated it. Would mind giving it another look? Thanks. --DavidCane (talk) 21:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the extra comments and support. The Great Northern and Piccadilly Railway will probably be my next topic to develop as it has an equally complex development history as the CCE&HR.

With your interest in the south polar explorations, you may be interested to know that I'm currently working on an article for Edgar Speyer who, among other things was the Honorary Treasurer of Scott's expedition. This probably won't be long enough for an FA but it might rate a GA when it's finished.--DavidCane (talk) 21:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Impressive work on Caird! That was so interesting! What's up next? Awadewit (talk) 14:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• You're going to the Arctic? Wow! And I thought going to to Egypt and India without three months was impressive. I've been totally out-classed. :) Are you going to upload pictures to Commons? You in a snowsuit, waving a "citation needed" tag or something? Awadewit (talk) 14:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • It's quite a short trip, but I do intend to take lots of pictures for uploading. You can tell Ealdgyth that I'm not planning to eat any dogs (but you never know what may happen in an emergency). Enjoy India. And congratulations on reaching the #3 spot on the all-time Wikipedia FA editors list. Brianboulton (talk) 16:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
    • Thanks! I think there should be top reviewers list for people like you. :) Awadewit (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

James Caird

Congrats on another excellent article! I didn't have a chance to get to it before it was promoted, but I gave it a quick copyedit just now. There wasn't much, but I did have two things I wanted to mention:

• Are you quite sure you want to use the spelling 'bale' instead of 'bail'? The latter seems to be much more common in modern usage.
• I noticed that you are using unlinked dates now, but your accessdates were still being linked when you used {{cite web}}. You can achieve unlinked accessdates by replacing the parameter accessdate= with the parameters accessyear= and accessdaymonth=. Here's an example: [2]. I've taken care of it for this article; just wanted to let you know for the next one :)

Maralia (talk) 19:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words, and your copyedits. "Baled" was a missed typo, which I have fixed. Thanks also for explaining the procedure for getting unlinked accessdates. As ever, your comments are welcome and appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 20:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

PR request

If you get a chance would you mind looking at Hillsgrove Covered Bridge, which is up for peer review? I think it is close to ready for FAC, but would appreciate a look at it if you have the time and inclination. Thanks in advance for any comments, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, I'll look at it later today. Brianboulton (talk) 09:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks so much again for your very helpful peer review - I plan to update the other covered bridge FAs I have worked on after this model (although I will wait to see what other changes occur in FAC). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

John Bodkin Adams - GA review

• Hi, sorry, I didn't mean to be rude. I've been working hard to improve the article within the 7 days that were given. Sorry if you felt I was rude - it's the first thing I've put up for GA review so I don't know how things work... Apologies. Malick78 (talk) 04:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Many thanks:) Malick78 (talk) 11:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, thank you for the GA review and all the hard work that went into it. I'll go through the article again in the coming weeks and try to implement your recommendations. Cheers. Malick78 (talk) 05:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		For your careful and thoughtful GA review of Proserpine, which is clearer and more accessible as a result of your probing questions. Your dedication to improving the quality of Wikipedia is evident - thank you! Awadewit (talk) 16:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Great American Bash (2005)

Hello, I saw that you commented on the FAC for SummerSlam (2003). Would you mind commenting on the review for The Great American Bash (2005)? iMatthew (talk) 18:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to, but it may be Tuesday before I can. Also, I'm going away on Thursday so things are a bit tight at present. If I'm not able to look at it I'll drop you a note. Brianboulton (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Wikipedia:Peer review/USA PATRIOT Act. - Tbsdy lives (talk) 02:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it looks like I'm shooting the messenger, but I'm not. I definitely take on board your feedback, going to take me some effort to work out how to pare down the article. P.S. IANAL, but I did actually read the entire Act. Took two years... Probably will remain Not A Lawyer. :-) Tbsdy lives (talk) 11:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... sorry if I caused any ill feeling. Sandy is going to withdraw, I'll try to work on getting the article down to size. - Tbsdy lives (talk) 06:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Great American Bash (2005)

Thank you for your comments, I've completed your requests. iMatthew (talk) 19:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Done, thanks! iMatthew (talk) 22:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

	<font=3> Thanks again for your contributions, peer review, support, and comments - Hillsgrove Covered Bridge made featured article today! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Lockdown

Hi!, I was afraid to ask, since you are not going to be on till September 18 or later, but I thought to ask anyway. I have the article Lockdown (2008) under a peer review and I would like to get it to FA status. From what I've seen you've accomplish, I thought to ask you so it will not get killed at FAC. It has went through a peer review before and many other reviews, since it was the first article that I wrote entirely by myself on here and was the first one I ever really joined in to help get to GA, as well as went through a GA review. Which seemed to never end because the reviewer put it up for a second opinion, and left, while the new guy didn't have time to finish the review. It finally got finished by another user and got promoted to GA status. Now it is back under review and for all the time I've lost working and fixing the article I believe I should take it to FAC no mater what, so I thought to ask someone like yourself to review it, that is if you have time, so that it will not fail the FAC. Also my name is William and it is nice to meet you.--WillC 10:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, and thank you. This is much appreciated. Also how was your trip? I'm guessing it was cold.--WillC 00:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Images

I just came across a few free images that may be useful for your Arctic exploration articles. You can find them here. They're somewhat poorly described, but maybe they'll come in handy. Maralia (talk) 20:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Images much appreciated. The ones from the Nares Expedtion will fall in very nicely with some future plans I have, to eventually shift my emphasis from the south to the north. Thanks for your thoughtful gesture. Brianboulton (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tropical Storm Erick (2007)

I replied to your comments. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:Featured article candidates/Battle of Goliad

Hi Brian, I'm very sorry for the delay, but I have finally responded to your concerns at the FAC for Battle of Goliad (thanks to Hurricane Ike, I've been without power for days but am now back online!). I have rewritten the lead of the article and I think it now flows much better. If you have time, I would appreciate any further comments you have to improve the article. Karanacs (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Karanacs, I hope your troubles with Ike are over. I've been away myself this last week, so I haven't got much done, but I will re-engage with the Goliad article, and post some suggestions shortly. Brianboulton (talk) 17:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Bad Blood Peer Review

Hi Mr. Boulton, I know you feel that you've been getting a lot of comments from WP:PW, and I apologize if you are annoyed, but if possible, may you comment on the above PR? Thank You.--S_RX 22:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thx

Hello Brian, I'm one of the french user currently working on Antarctica subject. You may know me by the map created for the Shackleton's Endurance expedition (FA on the french wiki).

I didn't really known all the works of William Speirs Bruce‎ in the Heroic age. This article has been translated to french and a lot of will come too. I hope it will be a good article soon, as Terra Nova has been from another of your article.

So thanks for all your job here, it's a great opportunity for people like me (and the readers of course) to better know Antarctica. Like tears in rain (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Query...

Can you do me a favor and look over Horse and tell me what you think? We (the Equine Wikiproject) just put it up for GA, and it was quickfailed because it did not fit the "mold" of the other species articles. (I also suspect some personal issues but that's neither here nor there). We're probably going to take it to GAR, but we may just skip GA and take it to PR and then FAC, so we can avoid the one reviewer can fail an article for their own vision of the article problems. However, I'd appreciate second opinions, if possible. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

On the basis of a fairly rapid look-through just now, the quick-fail decision looks hasty, particularly bearing in mind what it says at WP:Reviewing good articles. I can't at this stage say whether the article should pass or fail, but this reviewer seems to have taken a somewhat high-handed and disrespectful line in dismissing it so completely. I'd definitely take the article to GAR, on principle; it can go to PR at the same time, where I'll be happy to give it a thorough review. Brianboulton (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Brian, I didn't think it was THAT bad, yeah, it's a BIG article and needs some eyes, but we figured we'd get those eyes at GA and PR, maybe even two PRs before FAC. This is our "flagship" article in terms of WP:Equine, we want it good. Btw, great work on your latest, I just had two tiny quibbles! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Let me know when it's at PR and I'll pick it up and work on it. Brianboulton (talk) 00:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Will do. I need to get BACK to sourcing at PR, but not this weekend. Art fair! Whee! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

FAC

Could you, by any chance, please look over No Mercy (2005) and give your thoughts in its FAC? I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks, --LAX 00:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Lockdown (2008)

Okay, thank you for your time and comments. If you ever need anyone to peer review an article for you or anything along those lines you just come to me because I will be more than glad to help out. Also I took care of your comments and left some of my own.--WillC 08:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit.

If you could help with a copyedit of quark, I'd be hugely appreciative. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 18:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I will do this, not necessarily all in one go, though. Brianboulton (talk) 18:46, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

Congrats on the FA on Southern Cross. Fainites ^barley 11:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Date formats in Tom Crean

OK, let's go with the British date format. I'll make the change a little later. Also go ahead and de-link the dates, I've always thought it was pointless to link them anyway. What does July 28 in the Tom Crean article have to do with July 28 in an article about angel food cake?? (for instance) Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Farthest South

I actually did not peer review it, but will be glad to take a look at the article. It may take me a few days as I am fairly busy (and have only skimmed the article so far). Fascinating topic - hard to believe that 100 years ago the South Pole was still untouched by human feet. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Do you want to have the whole conversation on my talk page or are you OK with my part here and yours there? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Heads up - a map draft with dots is on my talk page, what do you think? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 10:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Brian, I will be taking a look at the article in a while. Jappalang (talk) 22:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Just saw it made FA! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

GA

If you've got the time, do you feel for it to review Dorus Rijkers or Pier Gerlofs Donia for GA-class? The first one, Dorus Rijkers, is also a DYK (Did You Know?) who appeared on the Main Page. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 05:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Wiki server problems

Brian, I getting a lot of network time-outs this evening and the server is much too slow for me to work. I'll have to return to your article later. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

• I have finished, (for now), torturing your fine article. Brian, please revert anything you don't approve of; we have different writing styles and, to be honest, often yours is the better :) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

((talkarchive}}