This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Choral symphony Peer review
It doesn't look likely that I'll be able to start reviewing this before Friday 26th, when I return after a short break. I would also like to look at Tchaikovsky and the Five when I get the chance. I'm sorry I can't be more immediately helpful, but I'm bogged down with Smetana and non-wiki stuff at the moment; however, I see that Liszt's symphonic poems are doing very nicely at FAC, so I'm pleased about that. On a more general note, if you have plans for more music articles in the coming months it might be useful if you let me know what these plans are, and the rough timescale, so I can work these into my reviewing schedule. My own plans are to do The Bartered Bride when Smetana is through the system, then take a break from music articles until around October. I have an eye on L'incoronazione di Poppea as my next expansion project for then. Brianboulton (talk) 23:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
I have your note about the History section, etc. Because of domestic commitments (4 July my birthday!) I am short of time this weekend but will get back to the review on Monday. Brianboulton (talk) 23:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Symphonic poems
Hi there. I've been a bit busy in real life and in tidying up some loose WP threads of my own lately. Can you let me know if you think Symphonic Poems still needs my attention, or whether it's all sorted? Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Just letting you know I'm done with a copyedit and a series of queries at FAC, the most substantive of which relate to the section on Raff's role. I am optimistic it can all be dealt with without too much drama. Only exception to that I suppose would be if you / other editors felt that Raabe should be used as a source in the article (for comprehensiveness). Good work. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on the promotion of this article. Well deserved. Brianboulton (talk) 13:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, Jonyungk! I just saw that Symphonic poems got its star - that's awesome! You put so much work into the article, and it reads wonderfully. Again, congratulations! Ricardiana (talk) 04:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Thnaks for your note, I will take a look when I have a minute - best, --Smerus (talk) 20:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I have taken this text into my sandbox, and will work on it. The Stravinsky paragraph is a bit confused, the Mahler stuff less so. Anyway, I'll work on it and get back to you. Meanwhile, Bedrich Smetana has been promoted FA (star doesn't show yet, but it's in the FA listing). Thanks for your help in this; it is good to see classical music's profile being gradually extended at featured level. Now for The Bartered Bride. Brianboulton (talk) 09:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
These are my edited efforts on the Stravinsky and Mahler paragraphs:-
Regarding the texts of his Symphony of Psalms, Stravinsky said: "[It] is not a symphony in which I have included Psalms to be sung. On the contrary, it is the singing of the Psalms that I am symphonizing".[28] This objective was as much musical as it was textual. Stravinsky's counterpoint required several musical voices to function simultaneously, independent melodically and rhythmically, yet interdependent harmonically. They would sound very different when heard separately, yet harmonious when heard together.[37] To facilitate maximum clarity in this interplay of voices, Stravinsky used "a choral and instrumental ensemble in which the two elements should be on an equal footing, neither of them outweighing the other".[37]
Mahler's intention in writing his Eighth Symphony on an exceptionally large scale was a similar balance between vocal and instrumental forces. It was not simply an attempt at grandiose effect,[26] though the composer's use of such forces earned the work the subtitle "Symphony of a Thousand" from his press agent (a soubriquet which has stuck to the symphony to the present day).[38] Like Stravinsky, Mahler makes extensive and extended use of counterpoint, especially in the first part, "Veni Creator Spiritus". Throughout this section, according to musicologist Michael Kennedy, Mahler displays considerable mastery in manipulating multiple independent melodic voices.[39]
I hope these help. Thank you for your review comments on The Bartered Bride. I will look at them in detail tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 23:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I've nominated The Bride. Thanks for your detailed reviewing work which has done much to raise the article's quality. Brianboulton (talk) 14:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Jonyungk, the oppose stays in force until information is given, verifying the image to be in public domain, or the image is removed from the article. Perhaps we should wait a few days more? After all, I doubt Sandy or Karanacs is going to promote so quickly on just two Supports and the email reply might come in later (or perhaps someone else might have the answer). Jappalang (talk) 02:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
The picture is entitled "The Philadelphia Orchestra and Mahler Chorus", and Mahler Chorus seems to refer to the collection of the individual choruses that make up the 8th Symphony choir. The image is copyrighted in the book by Bell & Fischer, a studio at 1324 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, run by Dickinson Sargent Bell and Joseph Fischer,[1] whose subjects include such topics as the Bell Telephone Company, the Philadelphia Gas Works Company, Philadelphia department stores, business enterprises, exhibitions, furniture, eating establishments, religion, education, health care, organizations, industry, interiors, streets, buildings, sports, and theatrical productions, as stated in this 1915 publication.
Even though Wister did not renew her book's copyright, the photo carried a valid copyright notice (the symbol). If this is indeed the photo, at least we know it is copyrighted in 1925 (and perhaps have a conclusion to work with). This does not discount the possibility of a 1916 publication (which falls into public domain regardless of notice), but unless the 1916 publication is proven, we can only work from this. Jappalang (talk) 22:42, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
RE:Choral symphony
Hallo, I'll try to find some time to review it. Cheers -- LYKANTROP ✉ 11:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
The Editor's Barnstar
I wanted to make sure I said thank you, however belatedly, for all your helpful comments on Tom Swift (which I think I've now addressed) - and for your helpful review of The Hardy Boys. I always appreciate your feedback. Ricardiana (talk) 20:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky
I'm translating your article. I looks awesome and educative. I'm checking the free extra spaces and removing them. I do have a question about ref 34: is it a reliable source? I mean I think you cand find a good one for "Tchaikovsky later claimed she was the only woman he ever loved".
I find also difficult to understand this paragraph, specially the last sentence: "While Tchaikovsky may have been romantically active, the evidence for "sexual argot and passionate encounter" is limited.[31] He sought out the company of homosexuals in his circle for extended periods, "associating openly and establishing professional connections with them."[31] Wiley adds, "Amateurish criticism to the contrary, there is no warrant to assume, this period [of his short-lived marriage] excepted, that Tchaikovsky's sexuality ever deeply impaired his inspiration, or made his music idiosyncratically confessional or incapable of philosophical utterance."
What does sexual argot really mean?
According to Cobuild, argot is "a special vicabulary used by a particular group of people particular group of people which other people find difficult to understand". "Sexual argot" would them be a vocabulary or coded language that described sex or sexuality. Jonyungk (talk) 04:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
An this "or made his music idiosyncratically confessional or incapable of philosophical utterance."?
"Ideosyncratically confessional," according to Cobuild, would mean the same as unusually confessional or having an extreme need to confess something wrong. "Philosophical utterance" would mean an utterance with great seriousness of purpose, as though someone were talking about important things such as life or philosophy. Jonyungk (talk) 04:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
My english is good, but not enoguh for those. I hope you can explain it to me with your words when you have enough time. I thank very much your job and all you do, I think you already now that. I just hope to reflect your excellent job in other wikipedias. OboeCrack (talk) 23:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Main page
Congratulations! Now lots of people will your great work (and hopefully not vandalize it too badly). Ricardiana (talk) 03:26, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Double promotion!
The Bartered Bride and Choral Symphony promoted to FA on the same day! Much mutual backslapping is in order. Brianboulton (talk) 08:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Symph poems again
I am miles away from my reference books at present and likely to remain so for a while. What the article really needs - as does the article Symphonic poems (Liszt) -is something about Wagner's essays, including The Artwork of the Future, which emphasised the need to synthesize music and drama. Wagner thought this could only be done in the theatre, thus through opera - Liszt liked the idea but felt it could be done without words in the concert hall. This was the foundation of a profound disagreement. See also New German School. Best, --Smerus (talk) 07:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
In the absence of my references, I certainly agree to differ - but may come back to this some time in the future! Best, --Smerus (talk) 16:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I am going to accuse you of being rather naughty. My citation was absolutely accurate:
'Wagner’s Faust Overture (1840, revised 1855) had an important formative influence on Liszt and indicates how closely Wagner’s imaginative world might have approached the symphonic poem had he not devoted himself so single-mindedly to music drama'.
This is from MacDonald's essay in Grove Music Online (now part of Oxford Music Online), therefore of more recent date than, and superseding, the citation with which you have replaced it. My citation is valid and from an excellent authority, one whom you use frequently in your work in this article and elesewhere. You can verify it from a public library source if you don't have access yourself to OMO. You might not like it - but then, ask yourself, who is exercising POV here? Can I ask you to revert to my citation and wording? Or if you really have problems with that, revert to my citation and wording and add something like 'In MacDonald's opinion'. Best, --Smerus (talk) 14:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your understanding on this - best, --Smerus (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky in Cambridge
Do you have any photo or upload one of Tchaikvsky when he was awarded with the Doctor in Music, like these two: [2][3]? They can go well in the article, at least in mine. OboeCrack (talk) 15:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
This phrase: "a sentence of suicide was imposed in a "court of honor" by Tchaikovsky's fellow alumni of the St. Petersburg", means that he was sentenced to death or after he commited suicide he was imposed that? Sorry, I don't understand it. Fellow alumni means school mate or partner? Thanks OboeCrack (talk) 15:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
It means that he was sentenced to death. Jonyungk (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
The last thing: "Rumor attached to the famous die hard", does it means that he died because he was afraid of being famous? I don't know. Thanks for your help!! OboeCrack (talk) 15:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
It means it is very difficult to dispel or get rid of rumors about famous people. Jonyungk (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Repeated sentence
This: "Tchaikovsky felt his professionalism in combining skill and high standards in his musical works separated him from his colleagues in "The Five." He shared several of their ideals, including an emphasis on national character in music. His aim, however, was linking those ideals with a professional standard for structural perfection high enough to satisfy European criteria." is repeated twice in the text. Can I know why, please? OboeCrack (talk) 15:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Another points:
"Contributory factors were his suppressed homosexuality and fear of exposure, his disastrous marriage, and the sudden collapse of the one enduring relationship of his adult life, his 13-year association with the wealthy widow Nadezhda von Meck."
The punctuation there is missing, I think it needs to be rephrased or add an and instead of a comma.
"Born into a middle-class family, Tchaikovsky's education prepared him for a career as a civil servant, despite the musical precocity he had demonstrated from an early age."
I think precocity and early age are redundant. OboeCrack (talk) 22:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
More
"substituting at the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow on short notice for the first three performances of his opera Cherevichki."
Does it mean that he replaced anybody else in that teather, or that he was told to do those performances without many time to prepare. The problem is on short notice and substituting (somebody). Thanks for your help! OboeCrack (talk) 15:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
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) 22:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your help during the translation! In only 11 days it was promoted. Cheers! Hope to have more time to translate more of your FA's. OboeCrack (talk) 20:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
I was just reading Symphony_No._13_(Shostakovich) and came across one sentence I found confusing; looking back I discovered you had written it some time ago. Nobody else seems to have a problem with it but I thought I'd run it past you anyway.
By the time Shostakovich had completed the first movement on March 27, 1962, Yevtushenko was already being subjected to a campaign of criticism, as he was now considered a political liability. Babi Yar engendered a campaign to discredit him, accusing the poet of placing the suffering of the Jewish people above that of the Russians.
The Babi Yar here is hyperlinked (although it's not e.g. in the preceding paragraph) and the use of 'engendered' made me think it was meant to be a reference to some person, organization or publication who had tried to stir up a campaign (surely it was not the occurrence of the Babi Yar atrocity -- or the place -- that gave rise to this campaign). Hence I thought it must be a typo or some vandalism; but checking back, I see it was intentional.
If you can define who actually started this campaign and accused the poet, would it not make it clearer to say that? For example,
[...] he was now considered a political liability. Khrushchev's agents started a campaign [...]
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) 22:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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) 07:55, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I've been working on Poppea for some weeks, and am about to send it for peer review. Any comments would be welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 12:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to let you know, Poppea is now at FAC. Thanks for your help and encouragement. I hope to get to look at Tchaikowsky and the Five in a day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky and the Five
Version 1Version 2
I looked at the first part of Tchaikovsky and the Five and it seems much clearer. Would you like me to make specific comments? If so, where - the article talk page? The new PR once it is open? Ruhrfisch><>°° 01:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I am done with my comments - I thought it was much better, thanks. Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Glad to help, Ruhrfisch><>°° 22:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I can try - assume you want to use the lead Tchaikovsky image big, and then the five little ones in a row below? I would use the one from The Five article - what order should they be in? Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
My assumption is that you want to go to FAC with this article eventually (and I can see it passing with a bit of polish). The problem is that at FAC there will be an image review and the images will need to identify their sources. To me it looks like most of these images are scans from books, or possibly taken from websites. The problem is that almost none of them say where they are from, and without source information I am afraid the images might have to be removed from the article to pass FAC. I would imagine you have books on these composers or have access to such - would it be possible to get one good image of each in some way? For example, File:Der junge Tschaikowski.jpg lists no source and the file description page says both 1868 and 1874 as the date of the picture. My guess is that this is in a book somewhere and you could say oh, page 12 of the "Big Book Everything Tchaikovsky". I do not think it will be a problem for any of these in terms of licenses as anything from the 1860s-1870s will be {{PD-old}}. I looked at the articles for Tchaikovsky and all of the Five and only found two images with sources. Both are color portraits and the rest of the images are black and white photos, so I am not sure if you would want to use these. They are also both from 1890, so much later. One is of Cui at File:Ilya Repin - Cesar Cui.jpg and the other is File:Rimsky-Korsakov by Repin.jpg. Both are by Ilya Repin who died in 1930 so they are PD in the US (author plus 70 years). Sorry, Ruhrfisch><>°° 16:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to be clear, I think as long as the source is identified, the picture does not have to be rescanned. I also like the all black and white photographs composite used in the Five article. I will see what I can think of. Ruhrfisch><>°° 14:34, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I found a nice image of Borodin and went to ask Jappalang about using it - great minds think alike ;-) - see here. Ruhrfisch><>°° 18:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Jonyungk. You have new messages at Jappalang's talk page. Message added 09:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
(out) I dug a little on Google Books and found some decnt images of all of the Five, plus one of Tchaikovsky in 1863 (he looks to be about 12). Please let me know if these would work and if they would, I will work on the composite image. There are links to all the images on Talk:Tchaikovsky and the Five. Ruhrfisch><>°° 19:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky's Fourth Symphony is one my all time favorites (I am humming it as I type). Glad to help, and thank you for an interesting article. It will probably take me a few days. Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:56, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, I made two versions - both above. Which do you like better? Any changes needed? I can change the order without too much trouble. Ruhrfisch><>°° 18:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I made a change to version 2 with the order to match version 1 (may have to WP:BYC to see it). I am not sure which I like better. Once you are sure they are OK, I will transfer them to Commons. Just let me know if changes are needed, Ruhrfisch><>°° 13:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Glad to hear someone who knows much more about Tchaikovsky than I do also likes the Fourth Symphony. I transferred both the composite images to Commons and deleted them here. Took a quick look at the Legacy section and it looks good (someone has added a citation needed tag for a direct quote). Take care, Ruhrfisch><>°° 22:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Glad to help - plase let me know when this is at FAC. Ruhrfisch><>°° 12:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Peer review redux
I will be glad to look at it again, though it may take me a few days. Thanks for asking, Ruhrfisch><>°° 19:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Jonyungk - thanks very much for looking over the above article. I've responded to all your suggestions. If you want to have another look, great, if not, that's fine too. I'm a bit stretched at present - I'd look at Tchaikovsky and the Five as you asked, but it looks as though it is getting fairly thorough attention from Ricardiana and Brian, as well as possible Ruhrfisch (?), so i might leave that for now. If you do still need more eyes on it later, let me know. I do try to be more active at FAC while avoiding PR (just a question of limited resources), so i may see it there! :-) hamiltonstone (talk) 04:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky and the Five
Hi, Jonyungk -- I just wanted to apologize that I'm not done with my peer review yet - this week is the last week of classes at the universities where I teach, so there's been a lot of students rushing around last minute with their heads cut off asking questions about grammar, etc., so I have been extra-busy. Tomorrow things should be calmer, and I hope to finish my review tomorrow or tomorrow night. So, sorry for the delay. Best, Ricardiana (talk) 05:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
The "Legacy" question: My main problems with the earlier section were (a) its length and overdetailing and (b) its tendency to separate the legacy of the Five from that of Tchaikovsky so that we seemed to be looking at two distinct legacies. I was looking for a focus on the consequences of Tchaikovsky's relationship with the Five, with the following question in mind: What long-term effects did this relationship have on the development of Russian music? A plausible argument might run along the following lines:
The initial hostility of the Five against Tchaikovsky was mitigated by Tchaikovsky's improved relationships first with Balakirev and then with Rimsky-Korsakov, the latter of who substantially embraced the cosmopolitan conservatory-based approach, as distinct from pure Russian nationalism. The Five dispersed as a unit, but were replaced by the Belyalev circle of younger composers that grew around Rimsky-Korsakov (by then a firm ally of Tchaikovsky's) and which included leading pupils of Tchaikovsky such as Rachmaninoff. The Belyalev circle continued to influence the development of Russian music until well into the 20th century.
The above might form the skeleton of a legacy section for this article, with much of the rest of the material reserved for a follow-up article that I believe could indeed be written. Brianboulton (talk) 15:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I like the slimmed-down legacy section, though its reduction may have been taken a bit too far, even for my blue-pencil instincts! You may want to flesh it out a bit, though not too much; I intend to put in a few tweaks of my own, when I have a few moments. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
More than happy to standardize the spelling. Will do in the next couple of hours. - Tim riley (talk) 20:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Later: done. Two "Lenningrads" gave me pause: I imagine they are quotations, and should not be amended, but you might like to check. - Tim riley (talk) 20:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
You are very welcome - I do not read Russian, but I was able to help with the two oil paintings. I also would be surprised if File:Von Meck.jpg is not OK, as it was uploaded by Jappalang, who is meticulous about images and their licenses. Assuming it is OK, it might be that transferring the young Tchaikovsky image to the English Wikipedia would work for clearing that image too. Ruhrfisch><>°° 00:25, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
I went to the Google books page, enlarged it as much as I could and made my browser full screen (F11 on IE). Then I used the Print Screen button to capture the screen image and pasted it into MS Paint. I erased the Moiré pattern in the background and cropped it, but his face still looks like he fell asleep on a waffle iron - sorry. Then I uploaded it here, Ruhrfisch><>°° 19:04, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
You are very welcome - would it make sense to ask David Fuchs to look at the images in the FAC again? Seems as if all his issues have been addressed. Ruhrfisch><>°° 23:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky and the Belyayev circle
I am glad to see the information from the Legacy section is now the basis of Tchaikovsky and the Belyayev circle. I can make the image color this time - would probably use cropped heads from the following:
, , ,
Does that seem OK? Ruhrfisch><>°° 04:13, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, assume the order is OK (big Tchaikovsky at top, other three small left to right across the bottom). I have a map to make first, so it may take me a few days. Ruhrfisch><>°° 04:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Here it is - have to add a bit more info on sources at commons, but is this OK? Ruhrfisch><>°° 05:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I discovered the Glazunov image was already on Commons in a higher resolution version, so I remade the composite using that version and replaced the uses here with a link to that. Ruhrfisch><>°° 15:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I deleted File:Repin glazunov.jpg here and noted it was available on Commons - if for some reason you think the version here was better, let me know and I can undelete it. Ruhrfisch><>°° 15:13, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks - I just found the higher res version on Commons, did not actually upload it. Ruhrfisch><>°° 01:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
You are very welcome - I am done with the image and am glad you like it. I also was very pleased with how it turned out. Thanks for your kind words, Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings
<font=3> Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and all the best in 2010! Yours, Ruhrfisch><>°° 23:17, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Re:Rimsky-Korsakov
I'm on vacation at the moment, but I'll be glad to review the article when I return on Monday. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 22:57, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I should be able to look at it in a few days (and will work on the composite lead image in the next day). All the best in 2010! Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:54, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
2010 Greetings
HAPPY NEW YEAR
This is Carcassonne in southern France where I spent Christmas, safely away from Wiki temptations. Back to work now. I hope you have a great year in 2010 for writing, reviewing, or whatever takes your fancy. Always willing to help when I can. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
.jpg)
, 
, 
, 
![[2]](http://www-chucol.mml.cam.ac.uk/users/las36/public_html/images/Tchaikovsky_Cambridge_1893.jpg){kind=link}
![[3]](http://www.russiancambridge.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/tchaikovsky.jpg){kind=link}
