User talk:Shoemaker's Holiday

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Marcellus Formation 2 pseudoscience infobox 3 Creatures of Impulse copyedit 4 Trial by Jury 5 Opera Comique -> Opéra Comique 6 Companion pieces to Trial 7 1899 cast 8 Trial status 9 Tables 10 Suture diagrams 11 Creatures of Impulse final tweaks 12 Edinburgh wikimeet 13 Creatures FA review 14 Trial by Jury copyedit 15 Trial by Jury 16 Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Trial by Jury 17 GA Review 18 E. Ellet 19 NTWW 20 TBJ timing

[edit] Marcellus Formation

Thanks for the feedback on the GA review. I've made the changes you suggested, and listed it for peer review. Dhaluza (talk) 12:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] pseudoscience infobox

Hi, I see you removed the infobox from Water memory, where is the infobox exactly broken? I first thought that maybe someone had vandalized it, but I couldn't find anything. Are you referring to the changes on the format that were done during the RfC, or maybe to the text on the fields? --Enric Naval (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course there is science, the theory was supposed to revolutionate Chemistry (and maybe Physics. It was later found to be full of flaws, but it does have relationship to some scientific fields, otherwise Nature would not have accepted it, not even conditionally.

For the name change, the solution is changing the content of the field to adapt for the new name, not removing the whole infobox. If you don't mind, I'll replace homeopathy with chemistry and restore the infobox. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

(btw, I agree that homeopathy is not a scientific field as such, and was totally inadequeate for the new wording) --Enric Naval (talk) 23:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

At the end, I added also Medicine, like on the Iridology article, see my explanation on the edit summary. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

LOL, man. It only says "related". I think that you are giving too much thought to this. After all, if it wasn't related to science, it wouldn't be pseudoscience :D And if it is related to science, since science is divided into scientific fields, then it must be related to at least one of them. Remember that we are talking of what the proponents are claiming that the theories are about. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Creatures of Impulse copyedit

I have a couple of other promises to keep before I can get to Creatures, but I've put it on my to-do list. Finetooth (talk) 00:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I started reading just now, but real life has interrupted. I will come back and finish this later today. Looks excellent so far. Finetooth (talk) 16:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Done for the nonce. Gilbert is always fun. I encountered what I think is a big problem in the lower sections, and I left a note on the article's talk page with a suggestion about how to fix it. Finetooth (talk) 03:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks better. Finetooth (talk) 15:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trial by Jury

I wouldn't go too far afield of Trial. This is the Trial article, not the G&S article, so unless the influence can be traced to Trial, at least in significant part, I think it's too tangential. BTW, re: my annoyance this morning, you should know that I think you are doing a good job, but I don't appreciate when you are preachy with me, which you are quite frequently. I know that I am not perfect, and I make sloppy mistakes sometimes. However, I think I am a very good writer and copy editor, and no one on Wikipedia is perfect. Before you tell me what to do or criticize some sloppiness of mine, I suggest that you review your own edits and make sure that you who are about to throw a stone is without sin. Instead of preaching to me, just correct something if you think it is wrong, leave an edit summary, and I shall do the same. I think that is the Wikipedia way. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you make the casting tables nice and square, the way the Pirates ones are, with the grid lines? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried to do the casting table for Utopia, but I can't figure out how to get the date header for the 1975 column to float up. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Opera Comique -> Opéra Comique

Throughout G&S operas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.130.15.240 (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

No, this is wrong. That is the Paris theatre. This is an old issue. Leave it Opera Comique. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Companion pieces to Trial

Sure, if you find more on Crypto, Perichole, or any of the other companion pieces played *in London*, I would add that to the articles. I don't think we need any information on companion pieces played OUTSIDE of London. Sounds like you had fun in the library. I am going thru your changes and making copy edits. I will leave you information on the Trial talk page about any significant changes that I make. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 1899 cast

OK: best of both worlds: I added a Note 2 to the 1898 cast that gives the names of the non-notable late 1899 cast members. I suppose that you could put the footnote marker at the end of the description of the 1899 production row. Where do you like it? -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trial status

OK, I finally have an idea of what you did. IMO, People go to Wikipedia to read the Synopsis and find out some background about the show and maybe information about musical numbers and productions. Please do not bury the straighforward sections about the show below the analytical sections. Take a look at what I did. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

See the talk page for Trial, where I have left my status report. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tables

That looks much neater, Shoe. Can you get them to compress more to the left, as in Pirates? As they are now, they look a little too spread out. I think it's easier to read across the columns when they are a little narrow, if possible. Also, can you do the same magic to the Benefit performances? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at Marc's code in Pirates. Does that give you the code you need? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, looks good now! -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suture diagrams

Hi, Just wondering if you are hapy with the final versions of the Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve#Suture diagrams? /Lokal_Profil 01:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Creatures of Impulse final tweaks

I think I buried my last short note to you too far up on this page. Yes, the current layout is an improvement over the four sets of notes. I went back just now and did a few more tweaks. The main one replaced the last big block of italics with a small bold head. It's hard to predict what might happen at FAC. For example, literary critics might weigh in with concerns unrelated to the copyedits. I think, though, that we have fixed most of the small things. Finetooth (talk) 22:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edinburgh wikimeet

Venue sortedish, I hope. Please can you confirm attendance on the page. Best, Asty (137.195.250.2 (talk) 22:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Creatures FA review

I handled as many of the comments as I could (at least the ones that were up before I went to sleep) but left a few for you. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trial by Jury copyedit

I'll put this on my ever-expanding to-do list. I can't promise anything in the immediate future, but I'll take a look when I can. Finetooth (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trial by Jury

Hi. This is covered by Opera's descendant project WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan. Regards --Kleinzach 00:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Nevertheless, and though I'm a member of the Opera Project but not the G&S project, I'll look through the article. Where should I direct any comments? Here? On the TBJ Talk page? I already have two, and that's just from reading the lead and the beginning of the Background section.... --GuillaumeTell 16:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I probably read through the rest of the article at the wrong time - I got increasingly depressed by all the sentences that I wouldn't have written like that (quite likely they were written by American(s)), but I couldn't really comment on each of them, let alone edit them. The content looks generally OK, though the enormous table of casts down the years looks like total overkill - put it in a subsidiary "Main article", I'd say. Anyway, I'll give the article another read. BTW, I didn't register any mention of the earlier appearance of Edwin and Angelina in Oliver Goldsmith's The Hermit and subsequently The Vicar of Wakefield. --GuillaumeTell 16:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Trial by Jury

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Trial by Jury - Chaos in the Courtroom.png, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

Thanks for reviewing the article, I will keep working at it.Gears Of War 19:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks dude. The review wasn't meant to actually be premoted. It was so that it could not only get feedback from the PR but an even deeper prospective from a GA. Tahnkyou.Gears Of War 20:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] E. Ellet

Thanks for your GA review of the Ellet biography and your recommendations for bringing it up to FA standards! Will be working toward that goal soon. - Epousesquecido (talk) 11:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NTWW

WRT this: Did you mean to sign up in the participants section? dorftrottel (talk) 00:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TBJ timing

Why not cite the CD covers of some recordings? My recording totals about 33 minutes (Godfrey 1964, 1989 CD reissue) -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)