User talk:RedRabbit1983

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
May 2007
Sept 2007


Contents

[edit] How to find?

You said here that "The article(William Shakespeare) is in the top 50 most viewed articles in wikipedia..." How you find that. I mean, is there any facilities provided in wikipedia to find how many people viewed a particular article or page. Pls reply. Thanks. - PaulRaj 10:46, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

There used to be such a page, but I can't find it any longer. There is one in meta-wikipedia, found here. William Shakespeare is currently listed at 77. RedRabbit 10:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Actually

Actually, I've quite enjoyed working with you, but I more than understand why you'd feel your net happiness would increase by avoiding that page. I'd like to save the emended sentence for you - we'll see if that's possible. - Nunh-huh 13:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the article is probably unimprovable at the current time. Ah, well. - Nunh-huh 02:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hamlet

I don't know if you're interested, but those of us working on Hamlet think we've got the breadth-parameter more-or-less covered, and the page could now use a great copy-editor. Wrad is keen to press ahead with a GA application, and the talk page consensus seems to be that the page has FA potential. AndyJones 09:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, you may be right, and I won't argue with you. However you may like to consider that clever guesswork isn't much different from natural talent. Also, that people judge how good they are at something by reference to where they are and where they aspire to be, not by reference to objective reality. You're still a great copy-editor compared with most of the rest of us, and I still think your input would be welcome at Hamlet, if you find the time. (No pressure, though: others are working hard on it, too, and I never forget that we all have real lives.) AndyJones 08:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello!

Is that you, Rin?  :o) How've you been? Galena11 17:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Taming of the Shrew

Well, as you'll see at Shakespeare on screen there are numerous versions in existence, and several adaptations. Here are my views, FWIW:

  • Burton/Taylor. Most entertaining, for its day. Feels dated to me but some scenes work well. Burton is a perfect Petruchio in scenes where he is bullying other characters - especially the haberdasher scene.
  • Pickford/Fairbanks. Not very faithful to the original; uses Shakespearean language but heavily cut; very physical/knockabout performances. The big cut is at the end: it stops in the wedding-night scene, and not with Petruchio victorious.
  • Animated. Quite fun, as all the animated Shakespeares are. Makes a good job of incorporating the Sly plot. Neat little idea of depicting the manouverings of Kate/Petruchio with the puppets doing Paso Doble steps between the lines.
  • Ten Things I Hate About You. Not really faithful enough to the spirit of the original to be useful inspiration for someone acting Shakespeare's version, in my humble-type opinion.
  • Kiss Me Kate. No strong opinion on this one.
  • ShakespeaRe-told. I like this version, a lot. The ending is a ridiculous cop-out but both central characters are potentially inspiring to a production of Shakespeare's play: Rufus Sewell is an excellent Petruchio, demonstrating how a character can be Petruchio yet still be attractive, and Shirley Henderson is a great Kate, a tough character who really does undergo emotional growth, rather than the usual bullied-into-submission reading or the glib enjoying-the-game-from-the-start reading.

Since you're playing several of the smaller roles, you're likely to get most joy from full-text productions. However I've just checked out both of these and in spite of belonging to usually "full text" series, they both cut the Sly plot:

  • BBC Shakespeare. Definitely my recommendation if your budget only runs to one DVD. I found it very enjoyable. It attracted a lot of critical comment when it was made because two people then regarded as among England's most famous cutting-edge comedians (Jonathan Miller, directing John Cleese) produced a completely straight, rather serious petruchio.
  • Quantum Leap (aka The Shakespeare Collection aka The Shakespeare Video Society). Overblown physical production. Might have worked well on a stage but like all the Quantum Leap versions I wouldn't watch it for entertainment. However I find they're among the best versions to learn lines from (if you learn lines that way). Also its DVD cover appears to have been spell-checked by a computer. Larry Drake plays "Baptists".

The only audio version I have is the Arkangel with Frances Barber. I haven't listened to it for a few years, but as I recall, it's a good one.

I've written a comic essay about the play myself, which I can send you if you give me an email address. AndyJones 14:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hamlet

Thanks. I see Roger Davies has been proofing the lead today, too. I'll compare both versions and see what I like! AndyJones 14:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the League of Copy-Editors!

Hi! I see you're our newest member. Anyone who can distinguish "can" and "may" is obviously well qualified :) As you can see, the need is great, and the few of us who are active can't do it ourselves. Looking forward to seeing your name marking some articles on the requests page. And again, welcome! Unimaginative Username 11:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Latin

Dear red rabbit. I am s orry i am bieng so rude but i am a newbie so i need to revise the rules again! Anyways, can you translate this into latin for me plz!

the king said that the youths had been very brave.

once again i am sorry. Da G007 (talk) 22:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1a

You're welcome. Please try my exercises and let me know your impressions—ways of improving, etc. Tony (talk) 15:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, you're good! I'll implement those changes (one of which I thought I'd fixed already) late today after my ... text clients. They're aimed at FAC nominators, of course. I figure that skilling up the troops and providing more copy-editing services are the two-pronged approach that will produce better writing standards on WP, at least at its top end of articles. Tony (talk) 00:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Guide

I'm not sure I'm ready yet, because I haven't quite worked out what good "encyclopedic prose" is (I have a few ideas for an essay on that subject, but they aren't fully formed yet). I don't mind making the occasional suggestion, but my own Wikipedia prose is still more turgid than I would like, so I don't feel I've earned the right to give advice to others on a systematic basis. If you ever need your guide looked over, though, just drop me a line, of course. Such a thing is certainly much needed. qp10qp (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asleep on the hay

Season's greetings and a merry new year to the Rabbmeister. Thanks for being so sisyphean as to care about the language here! How rare and welcome that is. qp10qp (talk) 12:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Style Council

I'll have a look in a few days (I've been doing some reading during the festive season and just want to get the fruits of that up onto Wikipedia before they turn to jam. Then I'll put my language cap on and get to it). qp10qp (talk) 23:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Action potential

Action potential has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

[edit] Image:10102007(009).jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:10102007(009).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:10102007(017).jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:10102007(017).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:18102007(006).jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:18102007(006).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:IMG_7715.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG_7715.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Nv8200p talk 02:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] how to satisfy ....

Thanks for your suggestions of how to improve the prose on that page. I'll use them when I next run through it, which won't be for a few months. In the meantime, I've no objection if your make those changes yourself; but I don't presume that you yourself have the time. User_talk:Tony1/How_to_satisfy_Criterion_1a#Suggestions

Cheers

TONY (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


Oops, and I see I may have responded above already; was it to the same suggestions? If so, sorry. TONY (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)