User talk:Giano II/archive 4

Happy New Year

Happy New Year!—Theo (Talk) 00:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Felice Anno Nuovo! Paul August ☎ 06:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad news

My digital camera got broken on New Years Eve in a bizarre accident with a 40 year old woman dressed as a smurf, a sofa and several bottles of white wine. And I haven't been able to get a pic of that Regency pub in Market Square. Terribly sorry, I'll see what I can do to borrow a camera from someone. -- Francs 2000 00:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Bishonen

I suppose you also assume that I'm a sock puppet of... uh, myself, despite having no access to other user accounts, right? —Empty Wallow | Wollaw Ytpme 20:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message, I could not care less if you are the Virgin Mary or Winnipeg Winifred, but you certainly seem to be a busy lady! Giano | talk 20:49, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I reside in Toronto, but thanks anyway! —Empty Wallow | Wollaw Ytpme 21:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mail!

You have mail! Bishonen | talk 13:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cynna Neele FAC

While I see what Geogre was getting at, I'm not sure it's particuarly actionable unless I'm given some more information about what sort of "wider context" you're looking for. Ambi 08:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. I don't think it's disputable that she's notable - she's a national representative and former national MVP, and a Factiva search comes up with quite a bit over a thousand hits for her. Yet she simply hasn't done anything overly notable off court. She went to high school, and played netball. She went to university, and played netball. She was unemployed for the best part of a year, and played netball. What little off-field information there is to know is already mentioned, as is the identity of her partner. It seems like you're asking me to find information on things that not only do I not have anything about, but that didn't happen, which isn't really actionable. Ambi 08:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I agree with you on that, and often object to articles being featured using similar criteria. The problem here is not that I can't find the information, or that it's scarce, but that (to my knowledge) nothing else actually happened. Elite netball in Australia, by its very nature, requires an almighty time commitment, usually requiring juggling either full-time study or full-time work with professional sport. It isn't like, say, professional football, where there's a lot to say about their off-field lives, because not only isn't there much information (the netball press is hardly the gossip type), but they often don't really have much of a one. I could maybe find something about her character/personality, but apart from that, I think I've said all that really can be said about Neele. Ambi 09:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably just me :-)

File:Pound.jpg
Separated at birth?

—Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

peace?

Giano, I'd like nothing better than to make peace with you. If my campaign to raise standards on the FAC page is not to your liking, I'm sorry for that. I'm probably more pushy than I used to be. Again, I'm sorry to have offended you originally over the Sicilian Baroque article.

You're welcome to converse on my page about any matter that concerns you, including any of my actions; my door is open. In addition, if you ever require assistance on any matter, please ask. Tony 10:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, I've taken note of your point that I'm sometimes sarcastic in my reviews; I can't guarantee complete purity on that, but I'll try not to be sarcastic. Tony 10:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, all the same, I understand that some people put a lot of effort into an article, and it's rather easy to cause offence. So I think they'll respond better if I don't vent my frustrations in that way. :-) Tony 10:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intarsia?

At Sicilian Baroque: "Church interiors with a profusion of inlaid coloured marble set into both floor and walls. This particular form of intrinsica developed in Sicily from the 17th century." I'm pretty sure that's a slip for intarsia, unless this is a specifically Sicilian term for opere di commesse as produced in two places: in Florence at the Opificio delle Pietre Dure and thus called by the milordi "Pietra Dura" which they shipped home from Livorno in the form of table and commode tops. It was a specialty also of royal workshops... in Naples! (I'm ashamed to know this kind of stuff: how is it that neither of us has contributed a word at Scagliola? Sicily must be the mother lode for scagliola: "...the scagiola mines of Palermo blah blah blah..." ) --Wetman 13:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Biography

Template:Infobox Biography has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Infobox Biography. Thank you. DreamGuy 07:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Francs2000's Bureaucratship

Thanks for your support on my request for bureaucratship.

The final outcome was (70/5/0), so I am now a bureaucrat. I seriously didn't expect so many good comments from everybody and I appreciated the constructive criticism from those that gave it. If you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as a bureaucrat then please leave me a note. -- Francs 2000

21:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at fr:Accueil

Dear Giano,

Great news ! The French article about Sicilian Baroque has just been promoted to FA status following a spectacular gathering of favorable votes, and will be displayed on the main page until tomorrow.

Take care,

Manchot sanguinaire, January 11th 2005 9:41 AM

That is fantastic news, and a complete credit to your translation. Wonderful that it is on the French main page too, and a great coincidence as I have a page on the English main page tomorrow. Well done you should be very pleased with yourself. Congratulations. Giano | talk 11:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice FA

Good work on Holkham Hall. JHMM13 (T | C) 15:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page

Please don't taunt the Americans. My camera is at Jessop's being looked at, and should be operational soon. -- Francs 2000 23:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just look at all these little flags appearing we could have a picnic Giano | talk 23:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:SicilyFlag.gif

here is mine

F***king camera

Never mind, I see it was a joke :-) Io non parlo il italiano! Anyway, cheers, It was a pleasure to have met you. ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 23:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fucking asterisks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to the edit summary "must be American," I only used the fucking asterisks so I would not hear someone coming up to me with WP:CIVIL, but I see you all are alright with this kind of thing. ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 23:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I'm American too. I'm offending myself as I type ;-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to see a user with more than generous use of curse words, follow this link - or go better yet see his forum! ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 23:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am finding all this profanity on my page very upsetting. Would certain American editors please remember you are not in the Bronx now, but in Sicilian territory - an area of deep learning, culture, and sophistication. Giano | talk 07:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah! Please try to do Old Europe justice when you're in Gianoland. It's simple, really: don't say fuck and don't trip over those horses' heads. Bishonen | talk 12:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I live in Florida so I know nothing about the Bronx. I love you, man! ε γκυκλοπαίδεια*15:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

architecture

Hi Giano

Well, I feel like an empty shell when it comes to architecture; and this country is a real mixed bag in terms of its built environment, like much of the New World. I'll have a look tonight, when I finish with clients. Cheers. Tony 00:22, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article appears to be at an early stage; perhaps I'd be more useful after some Australian experts from the field have developed it more. I've left a few pointers on the talk page about the lead.

I'd vote 'mild delete' for the bio-infobox, which is usually redundant and sometimes a nuisance. But when I hit 'edit', the edit box is blank (the other sections on that page seem to work normally—strange). Tony 11:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Olga Rudge

I'll have a look if/when I have a moment in the next few days. (I also need to have a proper look at Rainbow to attempt to derail a WP:FARC). -- ALoan (Talk) 10:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

R A Lawson pic

Hi Giano - thought you'd like to know that I travelled around some of the towns south of Dunedin the other day, and I took my f***ing camera :). There is now a picture of Tokomairiro Presbyterian Church, Milton, on the Robert Lawson (architect) page. Grutness...wha? 22:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grutness must have some attachments for his camera that I didn't even know existed. Maybe that explains why he takes photos so much better than mine (couldn't be anything to do with skill level, could it?).-gadfium 00:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you have to go to very specialist camera shops for an attachment like that :) My photos aren't that good, either, but I do tinker with the levels in photoshop before uploading them, which is probably what improves them if anything, but I wouldn't say they're particularly brilliant or anything. Re: the list of buildings, I may have extended that a little, but nmost of them will have been your work, i think. And as to our language always being polite, to quote a NZ advertising campaign, "yeah, right...". Grutness...wha? 04:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotha redux

Thanks for the reply. By the way, I decided to be bold and updated your article on Almanach de Gotha, but this may need more work. Also, as I see that you are interested in Baroque architecture, you may be interested to check my latest article, Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, and improve it. Cheers, Ghirla | talk 04:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Giano, many thanks for your kind note on my talk page. To tell you the truth, I'm not such a perfectionist as to work on one article for more than an hour and a half. Furthermore, my command of the language is too limited for such ambitious ventures as FAs. I usually write articles when I spot a red link to a potentially great subject or when I see a pitiable stub on some great artist, as was the case with my recent expansions of Carlo Fontana, Mansart the Elder, and now Fischer von Erlach. I don't have enough motivation or wordsmithship to work with these now that the articles were unstubbed. Let me thank you for your helpful suggestions but I believe I'm entitled to move them to the article talk, where someone more energetic and interested in the subject then myself could make use of them when improving the article in future.--Ghirla | talk 23:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Wardell

I'm afraid I don't know anything about Wardell other than that he seems to have designed most of the churches in central Melbourne. I suggest you try the Australian Dictionary of Biography, which is available in public and university libraries. I wasn't aware that he had a house in St Kilda. If you can find out where it is I would be happy to photograph it. Adam 12:19, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Mountfort

Since I was unable to comply with your request for pictures from across the ditch, I've taken some shots of St Mary's church in Parnell, which you might like to use in the Benjamin Mountfort article. I have more shots than the ones I've uploaded, including some rather poor interior shots, so let me know if you want them. I can easily go back if you want closeups of anything specific.

Also, do let me know if you're writing on any other subject for which photos from Auckland or Northland may come in handy.-gadfium 03:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Given all your good work with FA's and the like, and the fact that you've now got nearly 6000 edits in just over a year... isn't it about time you considered running for admin? I'd gladly nominate you, if you like... Grutness...wha? 09:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For those of you watching this place nervously with bated breath - I have decided to decline Grutness's kind offer, and concentrate on writing - which is what you should all be doing right now! Go on get on with it, before I change my mind! Giano | talk 09:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ah well... if you change your mind let me know. In the meantime, here's a consolation prize ;) Grutness...wha? 09:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, go on - I think all editors in good standing should be admins: it shares the work out further, and the admin tools are useful to all editors (rolling back vandalism, blocking persistent vandals, deleting pages where necessary). -- ALoan (Talk) 12:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch at FAC Bayreuth Festival, "Puzzled"

It's quite surprising this doesn't happen more often, I suppose. The first time you nominate something is hard enough when there isn't an old version. Nice catch! Bishonen | talk 21:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Wellington etc.

Hi, if it is policy it is ridiculous..what other encyclopedia/biographical dictionary use these antiquated addresses? Arniep 15:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. please see my comments on the matter here [1] Giano | talk 18:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, its not a Brit thing, it's just something a few people on WP seem to have decided. In British biographical dictionaries those styles or addresses are not included. I strongly think it should be changed. Arniep 19:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for picture of Palazzo Pitti

Hi Giano, I need your help. Don't be afraid, I don't need any translation. But I saw, that you posted that nice pictures with several plans of the Palazzo Pitti and I have an exam on that topic soon. I'd love to have a closer look at the picture, but the resolution is too low. So I want to ask, if you can tell me, where you got the picture from or if you have it in a higher resolution. Thanks in advance, Sarah ([email protected]) 16:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good

The Most Noble Giano. It has a certain ring to it, you know. ;-D SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tarquin Chinless-Barnstar

Is it really true that Wikipedia policy says all articles about British Dukes dead and alive have to begin "The Most Noble" Tarquin Chinless-Wonder?

Users who make me smile get rewarded. Absolute classic, that. Keep up the good work, and good luck getting this one resolved. Jtdirl is often a complete bugger to deal with. Rob Church (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A comment

The Most Noble in 2006?!! Zis is most ridiculous!! By ze way I have a prominent chin (c'est très beau, non?)

Arniep 00:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replying nevertheless

I've unprotected my page, so now you can see the fruits and nuts converge on me. See this thread. Bishonen | talk 02:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Image:Visconti56.jpg

Greetings. Back in October you uploaded Image:Visconti56.jpg. It doesn't have an image tag, and it isn't used in any articles. Mind if I delete it? – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob McEwen

Greetings, Giano!
You voted to support my FAC for James Aubrey, for which I say thanks. I wonder if you would support my current candidate, Bob McEwen: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bob McEwen. PedanticallySpeaking 16:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Styles

Hi, I posted last night [2] but it got a bit lost under the barrage. Arniep 16:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the debate is rambling on a bit. IMO we should follow the same conventions as other standard reference works, i.e. just use Sir and no other honorifics. Arniep 16:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong link

Never mind about the link, I got you loud and clear without it, I've responded at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. Bishonen | talk 18:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you always reminding me I stink at crosswords?

How about "unascertainable"? Bishonen | talk 12:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Monarchists

Oh, I think User:Adam Carr was very definitely implying that monarchists would be against these changes. Difficult to read his posts any other way. -- Necrothesp 15:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well if that is the case, he looks to be proved wrong. I have changed about 20 "Most Nobles", including the high profile Wellington and Marlborough and so far not a murmur. What though has concerned me a little, as I look at these pages for the first time, is the very poor quality minimal content of some of these Duke's entries, which leads me to wonder why they are here at all. take for instance George Sutherland-Leveson-Gower, 3rd Duke of Sutherland, I'm very surprised no one has volunteered him for deletion, apart from enjoying his own name, and marrying a non notable woman and having 5 non notable children what has he done to be here. I do wonder if it is not this sort of vacuous page which irritates those with less interest in the subject. Perhaps those that want to see a compete peerage here, should wait until they have more information (assuming there is any) before creating these dreadful stubs. I note the most thrilling piece of intelligence on that page is "George Granville Sutherland-Leveson-Gower (1850–1858), died young." I rather think we could have worked that out for ourselves. I am not against the members of the peerage appearing here, but at least let then be notable for more than being born. Their pages should conform to the same rules as all other notable people here. Giano | talk 16:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I suspect many people would like every holder of every title here. -- Necrothesp 16:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect some might too, but that's not really the answer is it, a lot of people like me just want to see a comprehensive well informed encyclopedia, and half those pages are not well informed or comprehensive, in fact they tell us nothing. Giano | talk 16:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is important to have a full history of the breeding stock for the current crop of competitors in the Upper Class Twit of the Year competition. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That comment is hardly helpful BoG! But thank you for you interest. Giano | talk 17:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I disagree: that page tells a lot: that the chap was a Duke, when he was Duke, when he was born and died, who his first wife was (not non-notable, by the way: she was a Mistress of the Robes and was created a Countess in her own right) and his second wife, who his children were and some of their relevant dates. What it does not do is tell us much about what the chap did, but in that way it is no worse than many other stubs. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If his wife was Mistress of the Robes, why is the page not on her instead then. Or are women on wikipedia only represented through their husbands. Obviously in her role as Mistress of the Robes she influenced many global events. However, I don't think just being a Duke makes one notable, they are hardly a rare or endangered species there must be many thousand world wide, or do you only want to see non-notable British dukes - I can think of quite a few obscure Italian noblemen who could nave a page too if you want to see that type of thing. Giano | talk 17:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AND if she was that famous and had the gumption to be made a countess why not merge his dull old page into her's? I shall shortly be starting a series on the lesser known Dukes of Castelluzzo you'll find them riveting ALoan especially the one who like to do his own Christmas shopping. Giano | talk 17:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She already has a page - Anne Sutherland-Leveson-Gower, Duchess of Sutherland. Anyway, I have added the dates of George's short parliamentary career in the lower house, places of marriage (Cliveden! Florida!) and death, and some external links. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say, the more the merrier. I'm all for Italian cleavage ... er peerage. Are the Dukes of Castelluzzo anything like the Dukes of Hazard.? Paul August ☎ 19:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No they are not. Now calm down - you are becoming over exited , go and flog yourself or have a cold shower or something Giano | talk 21:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, how blissful it is, Giano, to have missed the whole uproar. I've put my oar in a similar stretch of water over the provincial vulgarism né that only appears in the biographies of popes. The proles do seem to swing between being absurdly impressed and absurdly dismissive...Wetman 08:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message. My problem is that from writing architecture one does seem to come into contact with the aristocracy. I have no problem with them, or those who wish to deify them. My problem comes from pages which are less than glorious, relating nothing more than their less than interesting children. I can deduct from the minimal information that a child born in 1890 and died in 1895 "died young", and have yet to meet a Duke referred to as as "The Most Noble" on anything other than a command from Buckingham Palace, and even HM is dropping a lot of the formality. So to see all this pompous piffle here is deeply irritating. I suspect the European aristos (while more often than not better bred) would encounter a less welcoming atmosphere - and if they were low achievers too, quite rightly. Giano | talk 08:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Noble

I just want some kind of style kept in. We were only using "The Most Noble" before because it's what goes in front of "Forenames, Duke of X" — now we're just stating the conventional style ("The Duke of X") "His Grace" is the appropriate one to use so I'm quite happy sticking to it. Proteus (Talk) 20:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But all peers are inherently notable not through their peerage alone but due to their membership of the House of Lords (or the Scottish and Irish Houses of Lords), and it seems to be an accepted principle that anyone who has been a member of a national legislature is automatically notable enough for inclusion. (Some articles on minor MPs are equally short and stubby, yet no one objects to them.) Proteus (Talk) 21:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proteus is quite right to state that members of national legislatures are regarded as automatically notable. Any hereditary peer before 1999 falls into that category. The solution to stubby articles on peers isn't to delete them but rather to expand them. Mackensen (talk) 21:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I obviously agree that full and detailed articles are better than stubs, but stubs are still better than nothing at all. Proteus (Talk) 22:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not dead yet!

Thank you for your concern, Giano. I'm still around, though mostly because I'm busy with WP-unrelated matters I've radically pruned my watchlist, which further reduces the amount of work I do here, et cetera. (Odd: perhaps half of even the small number of articles to which I make changes are on subjects of absolutely no interest to me.)

A popular travel (?) magazine here recently published a lavishly illustrated hors série volume on Sicily (with a considerable amount of text by an acquaintance of mine). I enjoyed seeing a number of familiar buildings for the first time. -- Hoary 05:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no, the author I mentioned isn't WP-related! If you email me your "street address", I'll send you a copy. -- Hoary 11:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Styles clarification

Hi, your comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Clarification_of_styles. Thanks Arniep 22:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... I came here on the same errand. Bishonen | talk 23:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Great Scott!

This guy? Admin? You have to be kidding me. Bishonen | talk 23:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

No hard feelings...please consider this a peace offer, OR THE BIRD GETS IT!

Giano and Bishonen, we've had our differences in the past, and for my part in them I sincerely apologize. None of us came off looking very good following those unfortunate events. Which is all the more reason we need to put them behind us and move on with our work. You are both strong contributors and important members of this community. I respect that, so please accept my apologies in the spirit (no pun intended) of good faith and good humour in which they are intended. If we cannot be friends, at least let us not be enemies any longer...irregardless of whether I'm voted in or not. I regret both my actions and not approaching you sooner on this matter. But hey, better late than... Ciao--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 09:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am very happy with the way I came off thank you very much, and I would imagine Bishonen feels the same way. I note your contrition - anything special about the timing? Giano | talk 09:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you put is thusly, why yes there is. Should I become a sysop this time around, I want to start with a Tabula rasa without anyone on my "enemy" list nor me being on anyone else's. Such things are "baggage" which can cloud objective and fair judgement. Moreover, as a Sysop I would feel obliged to try and make this a better place for all dedicated, talented editors of good faith. And there is no better place to start than by trying to put my own house in order first. I'm not asking for your nor Bishonen's support here, merely admitting to my wrongs and hopeing you both accept my contrition like the highly intelligent, cultured and civilized souls you both are. The timing for the ending of a petty feud should be secondary to the fact of it ending. So please, again, let's end ours now.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all the time, but I see right through you Ghost. If you had come here even a couple a weeks ago I would have given you the benefit of the doubt. NOW? Credit me with some intelligence. There seem to be enough people happy for you to become an admin. as it is, so please do not bother coming here with your belated platitudes again because they cut no ice. I do not consider you to have a safe enough pair of hands to be an admin. I shall not be changing my vote but waiting for time to prove me right. Giano | talk 10:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See right through me...(LAUGHS) good one. At least I came to you with platitudes instead of an attitude along with good faith and sincerety. Ghirlandajo accepted, I don't see why you can't...err won't...nevermind. I thought when you once quipped "Even old Ghosty has a soft spot" there might be some hope for us. Seems I was wrong, but all the same, I look forward to proving you wrong. Buonasera, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why all this hostility? May I ask what all this anger is about? It seems unwarranted.... Spawn Man 00:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC). BTW, I'd watch who you call a kid mister dry cracker! I'm not just a "bunch of kids mucking about". I don't know what's going on here, & I probably never will know, but don't call me a kid again; Many a smarmy neanderthal has fallen prey to my fury after they think they know better.... Read my edit summary to see what I think about you right now...[reply]

Sweet! Giano | talk 22:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Palazzo del Te

A third opinion is required on this edit. --Ghirla | talk 15:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Giano, I reverted your changes, as I think that the current phrasing is just fine. I cannot say the same about my latest article, The Passage, which you are welcome to check. --Ghirla | talk 17:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had little experience with him but, as best I can judge, Ghost is a bully with a nasty sense of humor who aims to please those wikipedians he respects and to persecute those he disregards. I know him too little to make any valid conclusions, however. I'm surprised that Bishonen didn't vote and that Spawn Man retracted his vote.--Ghirla | talk 17:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken: I did not support. I will take my time and cast my vote before the voting is over. --Ghirla | talk 17:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will certainly vote. I just thought I ought to first give the candidate a chance to respond to the concerns I've posted in the questions section. Well, or to obviously ignore them, which he can't be said to have done yet. The nominator running around planting childish insults on Oppose voters isn't helping his cause any, that's for sure. (Spawn Man didn't really retract his vote btw; that was his idea of a practical joke.) Bishonen | talk 05:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Restoration spectacular

Bravo Giano! Worth the wait in line for tickets! (How is my application of the Dryden quote at Bathos?) --Wetman 05:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, (and because Bishonen may see this) I can claim no credit for Restoration Spectacular - I am merely the promoter - the effort and glory belong entirely to Bishonen. I'm afraid bathos, English humour and Dryden are all a complete mystery to me. My entire knowledge of Dryden was once having my advice very publicly and humiliatingly ignored for a proposed project at Canons Ashby , which despite the impression created in it's publicity blurb is a very tenuous link indeed. Giano | talk 08:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wetman, I love you, you're the absolutely first person to my knowledge to appreciate those parts of Dover Pier. I thought it was one of the funniest things I'd ever read. :-) Bishonen | talk 11:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The Passage

Giano, I want to thank you for having found time to retouch my article. Please remember that your edits are always most welcome and appreciated. --Ghirla | talk 15:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buckingham Palace

Could you comment on this please [3]. I know nothing of this subject and it needs to be accurate in the article. Thank you Giano | talk 19:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The detail about the £5,000 may be correct (though the source doesn't sound like a scholarly history book), but whether the Prime Minister was paid £5,000 or £10,000 he could afford new clothes. It is quite possible that the Prime Minister received more than one salary in the past as the office was rather amorphous. In any case the anecdote is out of the article and this new information supports leaving things that way, so it isn't necessary to tie the figure down. On the other hand it would be good to do so in the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom article, but I'm not going to add this information to that as I don't fully trust the source. Honbicot 09:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"equal"

Yes, I know the definition, and it has nothing to do with what I was saying, which is why I was, and still am confused. I have already responded on WP:AN. I DONT think they are "equal". IMO, homosexuality is a hell of lot more "normal", but that is besides the point I was, and am, making. Please avoid citing dictionary definitions for basic words like that, as it is a bit offensive. I think this silly little template is getting to everyone. These userboxes do nothing but divide, that is why I hate them. If have not already done so, go to the templates's TFD and vote delete, like I did. Thanks.Voice of All^T|@|ESP 18:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment here [4] "No one is "equating" them...whatever that means" suggested to me you did not understand the term. Giano | talk 18:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC

Blocked

I have blocked you indefinitely from Wikipedia for hate speech and inciting attacks on other users on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. If you feel you can refrain from further attacks, contact me or another administrator to be unblocked. --Carnildo 22:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see nothing that looks like hate speech or inciting attacks, so I removed the block. Even if there were any examples, indefinite blocks can't just be thrown around on a whim. Such serious allegations are what RfC and RfAr are for. Worldtraveller 23:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unbefuckinglievable

You were BLOCKED? Now I've seen it all. Input here. Bishonen | talk 23:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I saw your question to Worldtraveller. Think of the time these things take! But if you nevertheless want to, this is how.

A)You're supposed to start with a Request for comment, see this page for admin action RFCs. You edit this template. You'd need to get together with the other two blocked miscreants to write up and endorse it.

B) That's the slow way, though, infuriatingly so. You might want to go straight to a Request for arbitration on something like this, because then you can directly demand de-adminship by the ArbCom. The chances of getting it would be smaller without the preparatory RfC, though. Look at the requests already in place on the RFAR page and do like that. Again, I think statements from El C and Carbonite would be essential, you'd need to talk with them. But first perhaps to sleep on it? Bishonen | talk 00:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Also best to swallow your 1001% understandable anger long enough at least to make some good-faith efforts to have a real conversation with Carnildo about why he did that... attempts to have that conversation would probably be a prerequisite before ArbCOm would accept a case of this nature. (Also a prerequisite for filing an RfC, for that matter.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking news. Jimbo desysops Carnildo, at least for the night. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you won't have to jump through any of the hoops I described above — the relief! — the ArbCom is already on it. Take care. Bishonen | talk 02:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

A regular Deus ex machina. Seems to be a bit of an angry old-testament style deus at the moment: [5]. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can count on my support in defrocking the guy who blocked you and the like. When I was blocked last New Year eve for having fended off sock puppets of a vandal (now permabanned from editing) it took me two weeks to think it over and return to editing. Prolific contributors need to stand together in order to keep demented admins at bay. --Ghirla | talk 13:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thought for the day.

I'm on a wiki-break while I sort out my views and feelings towards the events of the last 24 hours. At the moment, (bearing in mind this encyclopedia had editors of many ages - including I think one of my own sons) I don't feel I can be part of a project that can send even I a remote signal that a paedophile in any guise is welcome to be here. I note that Jimbo has acted swiftly and decisively so I'll take that as a positive sign.

To the 2 or 3 who may want to leave messages saying "come back" please don't - I hate that when I see it. I may well be back when I've sorted my thoughts out. we'll see. Giano | talk 10:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth is going on? Gracious me.

As requested, I won't leave you a message saying come back, but have a nice wiki-break. The place will be much the poorer without your contribution. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A catastrophe — Paul August ☎ 16:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me and da' boys gotta meet out at the social club, and then we can take care of this matter quick, badda bing badda boom! Geogre 21:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RDH's RfA

I was referring to what I perceived as your attempts to get Ghirla to change to opposing RDH. I've just discussed the matter with User:Bishonen (repeatedly), and it turns out that I was utterly, well-and-truly, 100% wrong, and you were doing nothing of the sort. So, I am sorry. Your behaviour during the RfA was just fine, and my comment was incorrect and unfair.

Now ... as for the rest of what you had to say, about washing one's hands, having "abysmal" judgement (and, by extension, being a bad admin), and being sanctimonious? Was that just empty-headed posturing because you were upset with me, or were you really serious? If you were just throwing in extra verbiage to get across the idea that I'd done something wrong, well, mission accomplished, and we'll just leave it at that and pretend nothing ever happened. If you truly, honestly have an issue with my judgement, then this is a Very Bad Thing. Nobody wants administrators with poor judgement or standards. I'd be very grateful if you can point out problems you've had with me in the past, and how I can improve. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 13:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

A request for arbitration where you have been listed as a party has been opened by Raul654 (per Jimbo Wales). Please see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war, as well as provide evidence at /Evidence and comment on proposals at /Workshop. —Locke Cole • t • c 13:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right! The wikibreak is over

I have not got a clue what I am supposed to do with the above discussion. So I shall do what I always do - put a spoke in the wheel where I think it is needed.

ALoan: Thank you for the kind thought.
Paul: Don't over dramatise.
Geogre: You don't know the first thing about fighting dirty - leave that to me.
Fuddlemark: You really don't want to be here - it could be dangerous

Onwards and upwards. Giano | talk 23:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excelsior! (Click on the link, it's good, it could help you retain the use of your head!) Bishonen | talk 02:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Uhhh, Tony Sidaway insisting that a quote has to be in italics and then not turning it off so the whole explicatory passage is in italic? Is Giano going to march up a hill? Geogre 15:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plan of Buckingham Palace

I've been looking at your plan of Buckingham Palace, and I have a hunch you have overestimated the size of the original house. It was a nine bay wide building, and in all probability it had a double pile plan, that is it was two rooms deep. The main block as it stands now is effectively three rooms deep. I don't know if you've been inside, but if you have, you may remember that that the picture gallery is a wide room, not the narrow corridor shown on you plan. I believe it has been used as a dining room on occasion. Thus I suspect that the rear set of rooms was completely new. Also, I don't think the projecting sections, such as the one occupied by room E, were part of the original house. if you look at this photo of the garden front there is space for three bays were the bow window is, so there could be nine as in the original house without the projecting sections. On the other hand, additions were made to the house in George III's time, but these were mainly at ground level I think. But if my hunch is right, perhaps it would be better to amend the plan. Honbicot 00:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from your reply I think the plan should stay as it gives a good overview and some people don't even realise the palace has a courtyard. But if you can tweak it a little, that would be good of course. Honbicot 17:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mountfort

Hi Giano, Following your request (of five months ago!), I've taken a couple of Mountfort-related photos that I thought you might be interested in (e.g. this one, this one, and these two). I'll try and get a few more in the coming months, preferably while the skies are still blue! Cheers - Gobeirne 06:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of my comments at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war/Workshop

Any reason for the removal of my comments? [6] Steve block talk 22:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've done it. I didn't know if they'd been removed for a reason, maybe moved to another subpage. I don't know how it happened either; a right wierd one. Steve block talk 22:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe it

They don't have Scottish terriers in beautiful Sicily? Did the goats eat them all? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Countship" (sic)

User:Fastifex is rapidly changing "county" to "countship", i.e. County of Foix, at every appearance. This strikes me as a particularly foolish Wikipedianism. What do you think? --Wetman 14:05, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Palazzo Te

I modified back Palazzo Te article to my version. Ghirlandajo's version was good, but ABSOLUTELY not according to Wikipedia's Manual of Style. See Talk Page for a reasonable point of view... hope this won't begin an edit war. If my English is bad, or some info missing, I think you could correct or add, don't you agree? Let me know. Attilios

This is not a spoof. I promise a serious appeal for the children of Rwanda. Please send as much as possible to: Christian Aid, Freepost SW 771. London, SE1 7YY, UK. Then the children of Rwanda can all have a goat, then a life and I will probably be banned for this. C'mon don't be mean we can all afford a few goats! If this makes you smile send a donation, if you just want it off your page send a donation. GianoPlease take one as you leave

Final decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war case Raul654 23:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes

Greetings! You commented on the article Katie Holmes when it was on WP:FAC. I've redone the article and hope to renominate it on FAC soon. But in the meantime, I'd be grateful for your comments on WP:PR at Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 21:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:Giano/Thomas Sayers

Hi, just wanted to remind you of the "move" feature, please use it rather than cut & paste to move pages around, even from your own user subpages. That way the edit history wich is required for GFDL compliance is not lost (not rely a problem in this case seeing as you are the only editor, but still). I merged the history from the subpage with the main article, so no problem just keep in mind for the future. Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 17:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have created articles in this way may times - with no problem at all. I am aware how to move a page and of edit histories. In future I shall create articles in a word processor file. I see no advantage to the early edits and birth pangs on an article often full of mistakes in an edit history. Giano | talk 17:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, Giano - surely the point of creating the article in your userspace is precisely to avoid having the edit history littered with you correcting your own typos. Nothing matters in that edit history before you cut and pasted it to artile space. Would you like me to delete the "birth pangs" again?

Now, if I had done a light copyedit first... -- ALoan (Talk) 17:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ALoan, thank you - please copy edit and do as you see fit - actually the page should probably have the history too of Tom Sayers but that was just a 1911 text dump and nothing of it remains - I'll leave it in your capable hands to sort it all out - all these multiple admins everywhere, perhaps they should take something like a driving test before being allowed out! Giano | talk 18:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I've just realised that thing of Bishonen's moves about - Remarkable! Giano | talk 18:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that, 'tis nothing. You think the icosahedron is remarkable, get a load of the cute cyclic wikimood animation on my page. :-) Bishonen | talk 00:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

What?! You just realized it moves?! Paul August ☎ 04:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heresy! Recant, or we'll take you to the Holy Office. (Besides, it only moves some of the time, with some of the browsers. It doesn't move when I'm at home (and Bishonen's flower is a withered stalk), but it does at work. Same browser. Geogre 16:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, It doesn't always move? Then perhaps I owe Giano an apology for questioning his ability to see. Paul August ☎ 16:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)][reply]

As a matter of fact it moves perfectly, but only after the page has been accessed for 30 seconds or so - we don't all have the time to spend hours gloating over our own pages. Personally I only copme here for instructions on how to footnote my fascinating pages! Giano | talk 17:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Thomas Sayers, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 18:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, sir :) -- ALoan (Talk) 18:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I thought you had nominated it... I wonder who did. I'll re-copyedit it.

Harvard is ugly however you do it :) I would recommend the new <ref> style, which is simplicity itself. Look at, oh, Medici Vase. -- ALoan (Talk) 20:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have more vases - see Borghese Vase - and there are redlinks on another of mine, Gardens of Sallust - to fill in. The Ludovisi Throne sounds interesting, but I have been concentrating on getting List of Law Life Peerages in shape today.

Yes, you put the footnote text inside <ref> ... </ref> tags (always remembering the second one, otherwise it fails horribly), and then add a usual "References" section with a <references /> tag in it. Simple! And, yes, it works automagically. The FAC crowd swoon when they see it :) You can also add a "name" to the <ref> (<ref name="Fred_p21">) so you can use it more than once. I think Saffron is the epitome at the moment, although it puts the <references /> tag in a "Notes" section, and has a separate "References" section referred to by the Notes, which themselves use Harvard style using the {{Harv}} template (which I had not seen until just now). -- ALoan (Talk) 21:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me try a simpler stab at it. First, put the magic tag <references/> wherever it is that you want the list of footnotes to show up. Then, wherever you want to put a footnote into your prose, add <ref>My footnote data goes here</ref>. The "My footnore data goes here" will show up not in the prose but down at the bottom in a linked footnote. It's almost simpler to do than explain. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - I have confused you with my enthusiasm. Here is a very simple example.

It is very easy.^[1] Look, I just add these ref things and it does the numbering automatically. ^[2] Even if I refer to the same thing again.^[1] ^[2]

References

^ ^a ^b ALoan, 2006, p.21
^ ^a ^b ALoan, 2006, p.22

It really is that simple. -- ALoan (Talk) 21:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like algebra - I've had a much better idea, why don't I just write - and then you could both come along and do the tricky reference bits - it wouldn't be hard - I generally make them up or choose those that are going to agree with me anyway! You could just stick them in as the whim and fancy takes you! Giano | talk 22:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like algebra after you have done it, but look at the text I wrote above: it is the same as you would have written anyway, just with a couple of <ref> ... </ref> tags around it. -- ALoan (Talk) 22:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When poor Thomas Sayers has quietened down I shall have an attempt at referencing him as you suggets - how could the Americans have invented something as horrible as Harvard referencing? They are indeed an uninventive race! My late lamented Granny, during the Carter era, once lunched at the White House and was given what was called "Peanut Glace Ice." accompanied by what she thought may have been an American sweet white wine - I regard Harvard Referencing as something akin to that - best to stick at what one's good at putting people on the moon etc. Giano | talk 22:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why bother anyway some twerp has just taken out all the references [7] so we shall all be completely lost. Take my advice do nothing more to it tonight, and when it finally comes off the main page I shall do one of my famous reverts - is that edit adding all those extra "s's" correct ALoan. I was always taught that was very infa dig indeed. Rather like writing "get", "got", "serviette", "genteel", and "gentleman" - but then of course I am foreign to your language. Giano | talk 22:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think opinions are divided on "Sayers's" versus "Sayers'", but "Sayer's" is definitely wrong. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sicilian Baroque

Oh, a new footnote system — the excitement is unbearable! Bishonen | ノート 11:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Thomas King (boxer), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 09:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine mosaics in Sicily

Hello, I see that you turned your attention to boxing. Although I put some of those boxing bios on WP:DYK and they do away with a lacuna in the Wikipedia coverage of the sport, please don't forget about Sicily. I recently stumbled upon the stubs about Cefalu and Monreale and was so appaled by their condition that decided to unstub these using EB1911 stuff. Then, working with the world heritage monuments of Ravenna, I spotted Palazzo dei Normanni. Its pitiful state prompted me to start Cappella Palatina, a long-overdue subject on which I have too little expertise to persevere. I'm not even sure if what I wrote is factually accurate. If you do have time and interest in the subject, I invite you to edit these articles mercilessly. Cheers, Ghirla | talk 14:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry I'm not likely to forget about Sicily! Allthough I don't often write about Sicilian subjects (well apart from the one big one) I wondered who was reading the bios and DKNing them - thanks. I'm only boxing temporarily while I recharge my architectural batteries, I just became a little bogged down in "piano nobiles, facades and pediments" and felt like some action, and boxing has always been a hobby both taking part and watching. I will have a look at the Palatina as soon as I have finished my current murdering boxer, but I also have a major page on the architect William Wardell somewhere lost in a sand-box and he too has to be finished sometime, but I will have a loo I promise. Giano | talk 15:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Just thought I'd let you know that I've deleted User:Giano/Jem Ward per your request. Cheers, _└^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 15:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latest

I will look at it, but probably not today, on account of spending too much time on the pointed rocks already. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for the "horrible phallic concrete thing" but do you have a citation of someone calling it an obelisk? -- ALoan (Talk) 17:48, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox edit conflict

Fine, I know when I'm not wanted, I'm taking my spade and bucket and going home. Bishonen | ノート 10:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I've no idea what that surrealistic abcd stuff is in the notes right now. The letters all link to the same note in the text, what's the point of them? Anyway, never mind, I came to say it's a way cool article, it'll make a great FA! Though mind you, if something was missing that people usually want to know about boxers, I wouldn't know about it, the subject is a virgin field for me. Bishonen | ノート 21:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Dear ALoan, I'm sorry I put a mobile phone mast into your page on obelisks - it was foolish, and childish and with my hand on the cadaver of my family saint I will never mess with one of your pages again, and I humbly apologise. Your page is a work of art and far better without my puerile contribution. HOWEVER, ALoan are you quite sure that is the sort of footnotes that makes the perfect FA? It does seem just a little confusing to a simple goatherd like myself. Are you quite sure the intellectuals who stalk FAC will swoon at the sight of this amazing citation system? If you are sure - then so-be-it. After poor Olgababy's ignominious time there I really do not want to have to put a revolver to my head in shame. I've long since realised content is second to a citation system - but will you be around to fix it up if that twerp who thought Olgababy was non-notable comes back?. Oh this is all so stressful I'm off for a grappa to help me sleep. Yours in contrition Giano | talk 22:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And on the subject of citations I see [8] (thank you ALoan a friend in need is a friend indeed) the retrospective inquisition has started - I told you all it would! Fuck footnotes! and who pray is "Miss Madeleine"? Giano | talk 22:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to try harder than that to persuade us to remove the star from your pages, signore. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FARC

Um, WP:POINT much? I don't doubt your dedication to the project, but there are better ways. The edit you reference repeatedly is one remove vote among what appears to be a clear consensus for keeping the article. I can't help but think you would have been better off just disagreeing with Tony politely. - Taxman ^Talk 15:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I disagree with you (politely). Please read the nomination of Matthew Brettingham's FARC. [9]. While Tony has removed his oppose vote, since I nominated the others, there is a growing clamour on FAC these days for numerous references, and a uniformity of style and prose and certain personal information. Because the subjects I write about are often long dead and/or lesser known I am unable to conform to that. So the pages I have edited will eventually be FARCd, I am just nominating them before some-one else does - a simple solution, then all the FAs can be uniformly full of "compelling prose" and numerous references on well known figures. Giano | talk 15:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_removal_candidates#Giano.27s_Nominations. Taxman wasn't the only one to see WP:POINT there, and I have taken apropriate actions on Farc. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, take it easy :)

Your articles are excellent, and doing things like this only hurts us all. Raul654 04:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be brutally honest, I have been going though each of those articles, and all of those articles are awesome. You are one of our finest contributors. Period. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your cringe making embarrassing compliments. Pleasant as they are they are not what I am seeking, which is the improvement of the project, and some clarity of what we are all supposed to be doing, and who's advice exactly we are all supposed to be following before dancing through hoops on the FAC page. My views are here [10] A definition of compelling prose would be a good start - and who is the definitive judge of compelling prose would be a second. Giano | talk 11:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it wasn't quite over the line to POINT, as nothing was really disrupted, and it flushed out into the open something that I, too, was suspecting. It doesn't matter how often anyone tells people that footnotes, much less footnotes according to one scheme or another, are not required, that references have to be provided. It doesn't matter how often anyone tells people that a verifiable article is verifiable, that a featured article could use only one source, if there was only one source. It doesn't matter how often anyone tells people that the multiplication of sources and facts is not a substitute for substance, importance, and a centrality to culture. No matter what, certain form loving people, certain people who have trouble with their reading skills, certain people without an interest in knowledge itself, will attempt to apply a civil servant's imagination and a kindergarten teacher's scope to FA's, both on the nomination and removal sides. Further, when people find something to actually comment upon, their comments are imprecise, as often missing the forest and the trees together to comment on the birds. The officiousness of it, and the self-satisfaction, can get irritating. Geogre 04:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My views entirely Geogre. Unfortunately as always on wikipedia (I believe the former Politburo had a similar philosophy) no one will anticipate, address or rectify a problem until they are in the thick of it. Perfectly well written, informative but old FAs will be demoted because they do not meet "spec of the moment". The removal of my FARCs has swept it all tidily under the carpet until the next inexperienced editor nominates a page, and off we go again. Giano | talk 10:09, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I really want to get involved here but … One question I have, has to do with the distinction between whether an article should be an FA and whether it meets the FA criteria. That is should one nominate an article at FAC because one thinks it should be an FA, or because one thinks it satisfies the FA criteria? Equivalently should one nominate an article at FARC, because one thinks it should not be an FA, or because it fails to meet the FA criteria? Regarding POINT, this question becomes: Is it POINT to nominate an article (either at FAC or FARC) which one thinks should be an FA but does not meet the criteria? Paul August ☎ 19:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you've just made a very valied point. Giano | talk 20:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rattlesnake

Hi Giano - well, it was as surprise; but it was even more of a surprise to realise that I'd goofed - comment was for another article, not that one. Hope you approve of the edits I made - heck, if all articles required only that many edits, we'd be in clover! Tony 12:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Tony 13:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explain

Please explain to me what you mean by this edit summary. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 23:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to ask the same question and am not sure how to respond to it. See Wikipedia:Civility, really. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought that was perfectly obvious. Now run along and play somewhere else. Giano | talk 08:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly obvious? What are you talking about? Referring to me as "hollow" when I did not do anything of the sort is not obvious; it's confusing. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shoo! Pssssssssst! Zap! Giano | talk 20:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In case you do not realize, that sort of behaviour isn't tolerated on Wikipedia. Do not tell someone "Shoo!" when they try to work something out with you. That is unacceptable. This would be real juicy evidence if a RFC is to be run. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 20:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shoo! Giano | talk 21:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know. I have no problem blocking you. Do not tell me "shoo" when I try to talk to you. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:13, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking for saying 'shoo'? I am sure that's not even remotely justifiable according to any policy. Giano's edit summary was aimed at someone else entirely, anyway, and I can't honestly see how it could be construed as uncivil even if you didn't realise that. Worldtraveller 21:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'd block someone for saying "shoo"? We don't block for WP:CIVIL violations, unless if they become disruptive to Wikipedia, or take the form of harrassment. Open up an RFC or something if you find this level of incivilty unacceptable -- bearing in mind Giano's just asking someone to leave them alone on his talk page -- but don't try to intimidate with block threats. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In case you didnt realise, his comment was not aimed at someone else, it was aimed at E.E for some reason that I am unable to get into now. Anyway, by calling EE that, and telling him "shoo" when he tries to work it out with him, Giano is violating the personal attacks policy (read the examples). And when an administartor steps in to querry, he tells me "shoo", linking to some poision or insecticide article (which I find extremely offensive). That is a very valid reason to block →but that is if he does it again.Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are an an administrator?! - Well you and "Eternal" know perfectly well what I meant, now go away, and stop being tedious. Shoo! Giano | talk 21:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the examples on WP:NPA. I guess I could agree that calling EE "hollow" could be construed as a mild personal attack... maybe. But "shoo" isn't a personal attack, and that's what you've been complaining about. There's no policy that requires Giano to work anything out with EE, by the way. Even if the "hollow" comment and the "shoo" were a personal attack, you are way out of line with the block threats. I quote from WP:NPA: 'In extreme cases, an attacker may be blocked under the "disruption" clause of the blocking policy, though the practice is almost always controversial.' This is not even close to an extreme case - and if you are truly "extremely offended" by "shoo", I suggest to you that you may be too thin-skinned to be trusted with the admin tools. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you BoG my own thoughts entirely - and you too World - nice to know the cavalry is lurking just arownd the corner. Giano | talk 22:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? Because a person is offended when someone calls him poison/insecticide and tells him to "shoo" like he is an animal, that means that he is an incompetent administrator? What a narrow-minded and downright distorted view of the world you must have. I got my promotion because I work hard, I'm respectful and responsible (well at least the 80+ people who supported me thought so). You say I am way out of line, but you have said nothing to Giano who repeatedly asserts that Hollow (who I've heard had done some very horrible things) is E.E, and when the EE tries to work it out, he tells him "shoo" like he dismissing someone of lesser importance. And, being an Advocate and Admin, I simply try to tell him that he is making a personal attact, and he acts this way (which is encouraged by you comments towards me). "calvary...lurking around the corner?" so this is a friendship thing? In any case, I dont care. I have every right to tell him that, and if you are anyone else have any concerns about my actions, you know who to report to. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 18:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I find most interesting is that Giano had the intention of calling me "hollow", when, as noted by Worldtraveller, it was clearly aimed at Hollow Wilerding. I ask of you to refrain from making such statements in the future because I am not connected to Miss Wilerding in any way with the exception of volunteering at the library she used to terrorize before becoming indefinitely banned. Also, I would appreciate it if you did not bold two of your oppose votes here because if you are attempting to showcase additional objections, you are being decisive and unfair. However, if this was not your intention, then I apologize. From here on out, please don't compare me to HW: I dislike it. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dare say you do. Goodness me that library is a busy place, isn't it? All you volunteers beaverng away writing Wikipedia, is there any room on the computers for the public? - do the volunteers ever have time to stack a shelf - or have they volunteered for something else? Must be a very badly managed place indeed. Someone in authority is showing lack of supervision and should be dismissed for incompetence, and as for allowing that nasty old Hollow Wilerding to terrorise the place. It must have been dreadful for you all. You have my sympathy. However, what a coincidence that you should all be there together, I had no idea Canada was such a small parochial place - does the country have another library or is that the only one? I'm completely riveted - is there a charity one can donate to, providing Canada with a better library service? Do let me know I'm poised over my cheque book. Giano | talk 17:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- LOL! That's really funny! Maybe we can send the Habitat for Humanity volunteers to Toronto when they're done in New Orleans to build another public library. HeyNow10029 04:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MMM. Giano, you are so dark. lol. Boy, you can know when someone has had a bad childhood. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 17:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Orane! surely not you too, cramped up in that dreadful library - fighting over the computers. What can we in the privileged South do to help? - Can we send old computers, old paperbacks we have finished with - just say the word. Improving the Canadian Library Service will become my cause celebre. Giano | talk 17:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No! That's your comeback? Really? I'm very disappointed. mmm, I see you have a lot to learn. I would school you, but 1)I have a reputation to uphold, 2)I will not have a back and forth personal attack game with you — Im above that, and 3)I have school work to do. Your future posts will be ignored. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 18:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orane I've just had a look at your page and see you are 18 and "look 16". I would not have been so scathing to you if I had known of your youth. Most of the people (with the odd exception) who post on this page are considerably older and thus more experienced in the silly foibles of human nature. You have a touching naivety and trust - which is charming in one of your age, and I don't want to be the one to disillusion you. However, the world is a nasty place full of people who are not always what they seem. Now get on with your school work, have a nice life, and have fun with kids your own age. Giano | talk 18:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. I should apologise for my part in the incident, as I'm not entirely innocent. I know that it was a stretch to threaten a block, and I do apologise (I may have been an admin for 5 mths, but I'm still "learning"). See you around. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 19:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Enjoy being young while you are! - It's a fleeting experience , believe me! Giano | talk 20:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, you'd best refrain from making derogatory statements towards Canadians — I'll register your above post following my most recent as a personal attack. Do not call somebody out for something you are 100% not aware of; I don't use a public computer but instead one of the catalogue monitors. The library chain is one of ten and is separate from the Toronto Public Library. If you further your negative remarks, I'm afraid that I'll have to leave a message at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. —Eternal Equinox | talk 22:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The nerve of you Giano. To call someone out for using a public computer when they clearly use a catalogue monitor. And to run to the assumption that there is only one library in Canada when there are clearly ten!! How DARE you! Some people have no shame! I hope they throw the book at you! lol. HeyNow10029 04:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eternal, (may I call you Eternal?) this is terrible - I've just realised you thought I was making a personal attack - a dreadful accusation. Perish the thought. My edit summary meant I thought you altering my edit was a little hollow (i.e. meaningless) look [11] I used a non-capitalised "h", and most certainly not a capital "H" as in Hollow. More importantly, what on earth could possibly make me think you are Hollow Wilerding?

I love the Canadian people, but sadly most of my knowledge is only gained from your horrendous experiences. I've never been a library volunteer (in fact as a student I never volunteered for anything preferring to idle my life away playing football, boxing, lying in bed, and various other youthful and unhealthy pursuits) So I regard you as an example of a model student - a subject of aspiration. I have no idea what a "catalogue monitor" is (Aged 7, I was briefly a "Chalk Monitor" at school, until I was sacked for incompetence - is that similar?) but the fact the volunteers all use them to write Wikipedia is further example of the wisdom, tolerance and luxury of the Canadian Library System. (Knowing it has ten branches, I've revised my opinion) in fact I've linked it - in the hope you will write your next article on it. Are there very many other volunteers there like you? - That would be a blessing indeed. That a young man aged just 21, chooses to forgo the depravities and temptations of student life to be a Library Volunteer gives me hope for the human race.

I am concerned though about you - are you saying although you were not in the same library building precisely as the terrible Hollow - she still terrorised you and all ten libraries - it's just too awful to contemplate. I hope the Canadian Library Service paid for you all to have some trauma counselling afterwards - these things can manifest themselves years later in various forms - my Great Aunt Annunziata used to throw herself, her rosary, and her dog into a wardrobe every time a Pam-Am plane flew over Palermo for years after the war ended - it was difficult for her when the tourist era began. I grew up in the days of the Mafiosi but even those wicked men allowed Library Volunteers, upstanding young men like yourself, and "catalogue monitors" to go unmolested. Trauma and being terrorised by a woman, can have terrible side effects - as you say on your talk page, you have your love life to consider. So you make sure you have some counselling.

Hollow was a terrible woman, a positive Banshee, she terrorised us here too (of course you weren't here then were you?) she used to threaten to report people or take legal action every time she was crossed. (IMO) She should have been permanently banned from the FAC page for her behaviour. Vote stacking, insults and threats - Oh it was a terrible time. Respected and long standing editors were desperately unhappy, not me of course - I know just how to deal with people like that. If only we were all as wise here as the Canadian Library Service who have banned her for ever. Don't you agree?

Anyhow Eternal, I'd like to pay you a complement, I just love your name. I love all names with a galactic air for example Solar Serenity, Eternal Equinox they are evocative names indeed. One thinks of the night sky over Winnipeg, or wherever your library is. I'm thinking of having a sock called Luna Eclipse what do you think of that? Finally, there is no need to link my name at the beginning of every message on this page. I never forget who I am. Best wishes Giano | talk 11:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

O ~~Gia~~ O Luna Sea, uh-oh, no, some Japanese popsters have taken that one, O Serenissimo, I don't know why I happened to pop over to your page, but I did. What a laugh. Clearly you're having way too much fun, and I say: Keep it up! (If "shoo" really is outlawed, for the next defensive weapon in your arsenal try "Begone!") -- Hoary 11:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scaramouche! Scaramouche! Will you do the fandango? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:37, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a trend for all administrators to pretend they know what they're talking about? Many other user talk pages have clearly indicated this, and, truth be told, it's rather disappointing (although you may not be an admin, the others posting on this page have lengthened the dynasty). It's somewhat shameful that Wikipedia's most notable contributers are responsible for providing the community with the most negative energy. Well, I'm here to build an encyclopedia; not participate in playground games. —Eternal Equinox | talk 13:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not insult my intelligence. Most editors with a brain half the size of a pea will have guessed exactly who you are. Hollow Wilerding, Solar Serenity, User: Eternal Equinox - who next one wonders. You have not altered your style, interests, mannerisms or indeed it seems your location. In fact the only thing you profess to have changed is your sex - I do hope it was not too painful. Personally I have no interest in whether you are a lady teacher with hearing difficulties [12] or a young preppy boy with numerous siblings [13] - lets face it you've been the lot - What does interest me is that you are promoting a page on FAC and you have proved yourself less than honest there. Fortunately Tsavage and others seems to have the 20/20 vision you once claimed to have an - I wonder what else is in there, and who can blame me. Do not be surprised that you are scrutinised you have brought it on yourself. Your behaviour threatened the whole fabric and integrity of wikipedia - it was a disgrace. That you are so obviously permitted to return within such a short period shows a tolerance and touching naivety on the part of the wikipedia community which I do not share. Giano | talk 20:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You can continue rambling, yet I am no longer listening. Playground games indeed. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh, for goodness sake. Who's playing games here? You post again and again and again on Giano's page — in order to mention that you're not listening! Use a little common sense. Stay away from this page. Wouldn't people be more likely to believe you're not listening, if you didn't haunt it and pop up on it the whole time? How exactly is that "building an encyclopedia"? Do you see Giano popping up on your page? No, you don't. You're the one that's prolonging this. Bishonen | ノート 02:19, 13 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]
    - Actually, no, I did not post "I am not listening" until I most recent edit which indicates that I returned to this page to participate in the conversation intentionally. And no, Giano is not responding on my page which leaves me no choice but to respond here. Where else would I post a reply? Talk:Monitor? Now, this is certainly my last edit on this page regarding this silly little feud. Any comments made about me—as good or bad they may be—I am finished from editing here. Thank you.
    - Also, HeyNow10029, please refrain from participating in all of the conversations and/or debates I am included in. Joining a few is all right, but all of them is rather unusual. Thank you again. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Eternal_Equinox = Eternally_Busted. HeyNow10029 05:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

advice?

Giano, my favourite rattlesnake: I've just written an article that's probably good enough for FA nomination, but I think people would complain if I did so straight away. What is an acceptable period, do you know? Tony 01:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Giano; I might just risk nominating it soon in that case—it's Robert Gilbert. Why haven't I commented on the song FA? I guess it's not too badly written on a clause level, and I really know nothing of popular music, sadly. I'm what they call 'square'. <smile> Tony 00:19, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations and commiserations. Recognition and trial by ordeal :( But the rose-tinted image is very nice on the Main Page. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:31, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just throw my support behind the above comment. Raul654 20:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- File:Party.gif

Because of the "recent activity" on the palazzo's talk page I had not noticed its moment of fame was imminent, so it was a pleasant (no, I mean it) surprise. So far it has not been FARCd for lack of inlines - so lets enjoy the moment and have one of Bishonen's cocktails - such a generous woman. I am right aren't I , the rose tinted is better .......isn't it? Giano | talk 20:45, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enzo Sellerio

I've no particular reason to think that photographers are your thing, but suspect that some of his work may be known to you. Unfortunately my start to the article derives from only one book (you can easily guess which) plus a little (careful) web searching. Informed additions are always welcome! (Oh, and, erm, congratulations on whatever it is that ALoan and Raul654 are congratulating you on -- precedents tell me that whatever it is it will be first rate -- but they phrase it so obliquely that I really don't know what it is. Which palazzo?) -- Hoary 03:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly I don't seem to have much time to do very much on Wikipedia theses days for any serious work. I have two near finished articles in sandboxes which I should finish before I look at anything else. I've a rudimentary knowledge of Enzo Sellerio, and a book of his at home, but that seems a very long away away at the moment. I'll take a look when I'm there at Easter (remind me if I forget!). The Palazzo is Palazzo Pitti which turned up on the main page recently. I think (hope) the congratulations is for having a page with no "inline cites". I've nothing against them personally. and for the newly created pages they are quite helpful unless of course they have to follow each verb - which seems to be what some people want. So, I'm having a one man crusade against being instructed how to write and reference a page and save all the old FAs from demotion or being fiddled with by people who know nothing about the subject. Giano | talk 08:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, first off, congratulations! I think I know what you mean about inline cites, or anyway <ref>. The visual effect is not good in any browser I use, and in the browser I use most it's utterly hideous. It also seems absurd to have to cite sources for information that both (i) can be found with moderate ease by anyone with a moderate degree of interest in the subject and also (ii) isn't known to have been questioned by any sane person and isn't likely to be. Moreover, the earlier carping about an article largely written by you seemed small-minded. All those things aside, however, I'm in favor of them. But while I'm sure I know how to achieve them when (as doesn't and can't occur in WP) I'm given complete control, I'm not happy with any method I've yet thought of here. Anyway, I look forward to reading Palazzo Pitti soon. (Of course I've been to the actual place, and my memories are fairly vivid.) -- Hoary 09:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woman

As I noticed on User talk:Raul654, you called me a "tedious woman". I have registered this as a personal attack because I am neither of the above and am referring you to Wikipedia:No personal attacks. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would that be a wise move for you? ..and I think it was tiresome and tediousGiano | talk 07:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ives

Done and done. Mak emi 07:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are aware...

...that the text you just reinserted was moved to the talk page for that nomination to try to keep the page clutter down? It wasn't just blanked. I don't remember who moved it, but I remember seeing the edit summary. --Syrthiss 18:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave the text where I have replaced it. Removing important facts and debate on a subject is considered a crime in most official explorations of subject. Facts are never clutter - only to those who do not wish to see them. A tidy mind is an ignorant mind! Giano | talk 19:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not accuse me of removing your text as I did no such thing. I believe in harmonious editing, so I wouldn't have removed it without checking with you...and seeing such a prickly, bad faith-assuming reply I'll leave you to your doings. --Syrthiss 19:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see no accusations merely a request to leave well alone. Giano | talk 19:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tone

A bit of a tone there, wasn't there? Was it absolutely necessary? Bishonen | ノート 16:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Well you have asked two very different questions there haven't you. I hope this not only answers your questions, but makes Gmaxwell understand the Carnildo's behaviour and the Arbcoms response left a lot of anger and emotion behind which sometimes finds the wrong, or at least nearest target.

Tone? The tone sounds to me a little like that of a barrister discrediting the defence's star witness. Necessary? I don't suppose anyone can say with certainty. The problem is that like it or not this particular RFA is even more a trial than most, the fault for that must lie mostly with the Arbcom who in their original "trial" achieved the near impossible result of satisfying neither offender or offended. It is an impossible task to be both judge and jury. Jury's may (and indeed should) squabble legitimately, Judges have to be experienced and absolute in their conviction the sentence is appropriate. Sentencing by committee is always a weak affair of compromises.

Thus, Carnildo seems to consider himself still to have done nothing worthy of such unjust treatment, and the offended (I can only speak for myself) feel that before being eligible for reapplication he should have at least have had to realise how offended people were by his actions, or at least been forced to wait much longer than than the minimum two weeks specified. That the clerk of the court was on Carnildo's page asking him to apply for adminship at the immediate end of that period appeared to me tasteless. On that occasion Carnildo had the sense to decline, but in my opinion should have waited longer still. Let us not forget here Carnildo accused three experienced editors (2 of them admins) of "hate speech" a serious charge in any community, found them guilty and banned them all in the space of a few minutes. Then having caused the situation walked away and left others to sort his appalling mess out. That in itself, should have bought a further charge of is neglect of responsibility. Remember all three he banned were completely innocent, one has left and the two remaining seem to be very hurt still. None have received any explanation or apology from Carnildo.

So there you have it - a whole sorry saga of injustice still claiming victims. I'm truly sorry that GMaxwell has chosen to express in an edit summary he is "hurt" by my treatment of him. He should not have ever been able to find himself in the position of having to defend Carnildo - his loyalty to his friend is a credit to him and I hope he edits again, but he must realise there is far more at stake here than Carnildo being able delete a few images in the future. As for GMaxwell's suggestion about moving on - Certainly I hope so at some time in the future, but with no seeming atonement at all from Carnildo, and so many people voting for Carnildo and thus making light of one's own hurt on the matter it is very hard. I'm go glad you supported me there. Thanks. Giano | talk 08:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carnildo's RFA

Re: [14] What..Ban you?! And lose my most worthy nemesis and one of my greatest sources of amusement and bemusement on here?! Why you must think me a complete uncivilized cad, Sir! Besides, as a Mafioso you should know- "Keep friends close, keep enemies closer":). But flatter yourself not too much...if Carnildo had banned Satan for the same poor reasons, I'd work with Old Scratch himself to see that he's never allowed near the Op Mop again. Thanks for the Pope BTW. But I'm really more of an admirer of Innocent X's enemy Marzarin. And as far as Popes are concerned there's Julius II and gotta love Alex VI:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well Ghost before you get too chummy remember where those Popes went the Inquisition usually followed. Not that I would wish to see you being slowly incinerated over a brazier of red hot coals. Perish the thought! Giano | talk 09:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meh sounds like A typical August day in Gainesville Florida. So that scenario holds few terrors for me. Besides, the only one Pope Alex had burned was that Renaissance Robspierre cum Ayatollah, Savonarola. Good riddance I say:) And Pater Jules II was too busy overseeing monumental building projects, patronizing great artworks and bashing heads in war, to be bothered with burnings. :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 04:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OMG they're bonding. What a horrible sight. Bishonen

talk 07:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]

COOL! We've made Bishonen wince! High 5 G!;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

I'm not sure why you left a note that I accidentally removed your message. It was accidentally removed by Tom harrison in this edit, not in mine. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 20:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CIVIL

"The upside is that it gives those who never had the opportunity to be a prefect at school a few moments of glory enforcing those rules which to most seem pointless and frankly rather silly." You will notice that I have done nothing but point, again and again, to very clear-cut Foundation copyright policy, yet you have continued to argue for exceptions and uncivilly accusing others of going about things in the wrong way. It's not a matter to just ignore after R.D.H. has been asked to remove those images numerous times over two months. I don't understand why the debate at WP:ANI has gone on like it has. Please consider being civil in the future. Thanks. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 22:24, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are all to be congratulated on your enforcement of the rules. I once questioned the necessity for silly school rules and was told they were character forming. You are to be thanked for assisting us all. It is perfectly reasonable for the governors of this ancient and venerable seat of learning to decide that the spotty youth known as RDH Ghost (minor), of the Cadet Force, may not display his favourite album cover on his dormitory locker. I am minded of my own very joyful school days and the rule "all boys will make their confession before High Mass - boys with nothing to confess may confess with the Altar Boys on Thursday morning" and famously "Intransigence of school rules must be confessed to the Headmaster before Matins on Friday - in certain cases boys may be permitted to choose between a beating and penance" - that one got a lot of takers. Oh happy days - how nice to be back. Regular reader will not be surprised to learn I, of course, was an Altar Boy. Giano | talk 08:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) — Rebelguys2 ^talk 15:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FAC Page

Thanks for your comment. :) I had submitted it to a peer review before, but got very little feedback. I must admit the FAC feedback was more helpful. Thanks again. Arundhati bakshi 00:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lawson church in Gore

On July 20, 2005 you added the following to Gore, New Zealand : "The town has a wooden Gothic church designed by the eminent architect R A Lawson". There has been a question on the talk page to ask which church this is. I suspect that it is the old East Gore Presbyterian Church. Do you have any more details that would clarify this? Blarneytherinosaur 00:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I am a thousand miles away from Gore myself, but I remember being struck by the East Gore Presbyterian Church when I was last there. I know Grutness is a local, contributer to the Lawson article, and a great photographer, so I'll see if he can help us. Thanks again. Blarneytherinosaur 23:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have just found a article about the East Gore Presbyterian Church that confirms that it was indeed built by Robert Lawson, and includes a photograph. Here's the link if you want to have a look. (It's a .PDF, so it's a bit big if you are using dialup). Blarneytherinosaur 00:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Buckingham Gaol 19th century.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Buckingham Gaol 19th century.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Jkelly 06:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further explanation

User:Bishonen suggested that the above boilerplate is less than helpful in explaining why I tagged that image. I responded here. Jkelly 08:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Musing on sourcing old prints

I don't imagine that there should be any issue. We really only need to know when something was first published and the creator's date of death (or when something unpublished and created anonymously was created) to have all the information we need to claim that it is in the public domain. This is perhaps a flaw in the whole image-tagging thing; I certainly don't expect to see "From the private collection of [[en:User:Giano]], please call the following number between these times for verification (or, for a small fee, private viewings)..." when I tag something Template:Nsd, but the statement "This image is unsourced!" might imply that. The whole system is set up with the assumption that any image is taken from some website (almost always true), or scanned from some book, so the language the boilerplates use reflects that. Incidentally, your new description at Image:Buckingham Gaol 19th century.jpg not only assures everyone that it is PD, it is also kind-of interesting information. I liked learning what the provenance of the image was. I notice we are lacking a template for "Anonymous creator, unpublished, created over 120 years ago.", which is what may actually apply here.

What do you think of Wikimedia Commons, by the way? They tend to be even stricter about image descriptions and copyright claims, but images there can be used by every project. Jkelly 17:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason I have never quite fathomed Commons always logs me out as I try to upload, allthough I have only ever tried to do this from Sicily where very strange things happen with the internet in the area I live, it's dial up only, and half the time the lines are lying on the road, so it's probably every time a car runs over them or something. I will try from England some time - I'm here now so I'll give it a try, I always mean to, but it just seems quicker and easier to do whay you know! Giano | talk 18:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am there a lot. I move a lot of images there which have been listed on WP:IFD here but strike me as potentially useful in some article somewhere. Its a little challenging to navigate, and the loading times are a pain. I like the concept, though. Jkelly 03:40, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, honestly, look at this

Did you see this? I've always thought bureaucrat must be the least rewarding job we have, but I didn't know this kind of crap came with it. :-( Bishonen talk 14:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Will you leave my page alone for a minute! I am busy composing a missive to poor Graham! Giano | talk 14:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right I'm free now - what was it you wanted? Oh I see a lovely new image on top of the page. Thank you very much Bishonen, most kind and thoughtful. Poor old Graham, they don't sound a very nice lot in the upper echelons do they, glad I'm down here, actually I can't find the link to read all about it, but I expect it's all pretty horrible! Good thing we don't have all this nastiness down here in the basement isn't it? Giano | talk 14:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basement? Bish and I are both middle-management, I would have you know, although we take perverse pleasure in occasionally mixing with the hoi polloi. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am only too aware of how honoured by humble little page is by it's frequent August guests. I have even entertained Raul here on occasions you know, he and Jimbo are very keen to avail themselves of my beautiful "Palazzo Splendido" in the Caymen Islands, but there is the small matter of my next front page to discuss before my yacht "Il Dono Gigante" takes them there Giano | talk 15:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments

Greetings, Giano!
I saw your replies to Carnildo's comments on my vote on his new RFA and wanted to thank you for them. Notice that nothing he says actually addresses the points I raised, merely questions my motives for the vote. There's no point in my commenting on the page, one, because the vote is closed, and two, because he does not reply to people except to snipe as in this instance. If you need another admin's support in actions against this user, please let me know. PedanticallySpeaking 15:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I though t you and Encaphlon spoke very well. I do not anticipate being troubled by this user again as I plan to put a great distance between us. The odd thing is I don't think I have ever had any contact with him before or since the famous episode - I certainly can't remember it if I did. I just wish he would teach that bloody orhanbot thing to read, then even that could stay away from me. Shame poor old Gmaxwell is still in the doldrums over it all, but there you are, can't make an omlette without breaking a few good eggs I suppose. Thanks for the message. Giano | talk 15:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I too have never seen this user except in regards to his negative votes on FAC pages. Never. (And I've been here 18 months, have 10,000+ edits, and have edited thousands of pages.) The only thing I see him doing is running OrphanBot, which drives many up the wall. (Just look at the comments on its and Carnildo's talk pages.) I really don't see anything he does except enforce his notions on images and snipe at anyone who questions him. If I can help you on your articles, let me know; my ambit lately has been pop culture (e.g. Katie Holmes) and Ohio politicians (e.g. Bruce Johnson) but I've helped out all over the place. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"If you need another admin's support in actions against this user, please let me know"? Dear god, could he be a little more circumspect in his eagerness to carry on a vendetta? How crass. OK, ok, I shall AGF and read it to mean "if you find yourself unfairly harassed by Carnildo and need some assistance, call on me." —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The assumption I have a "vendetta" is precisely why people throw their hands up in disgust and walk away from Wikipedia. Your second reading is the correct one intended. PedanticallySpeaking 16:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think your phrasing was a little unfortunate, but I take you at your word, and I'm sorry if my phrasing ("vendetta") went too far. Really. I made a mistake. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Good Evening BoG <glacial frost> how nice to see you here. Where I come from we know all about vendettas, and it's rather tactless and cruel of you to mention it considering the way my late Great Aunt Concezione-Immaculate met her end. I could understand PS perfectly well, but then I am a very nice person who only ever sees the good in people. Are you a native English speaker? - While you are here, you will surely know the answer, what is all this "Esperanza" business I keep seeing popping up on people's talk pages? - For months I thought it was something to do with that peculiar language that is supposed to unite us all, but doesn't because only you Americans ever attempt to learn it, we in Europe are quite happy with our own languages - Anyway it seems to be for people with problems, and I can't find a link to it, not that I have a problem - but I know quite a few who do.........especially someone with a judgement and voting problem! What is it all about I'm curious to know Giano | talk 18:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't going to be frosty on me just because I felt the other way on an RfA that soundly lost anyway, are you? Certainly not! As for Wikipedia:Esperanza, they're a nice enough group of people who labour under the impression that there's something that can actually be done about wikistress, although I don't know how much calming influence a picture of a cup of coffee ever really has had on anybody who is really worked up. They also have a fabulous service to pester you on your birthday, if you like. On the downide, they've built up some strange ritual pseudogovernmental system of posts and elections for... no reason anyone can discern, and sometimes if someone says they are leaving the project, they will pester and beg them to stay in a fashion I for one find unbecoming at times. And for the record, I was raised by a family of Bigfoots and thus my native language is pig latin. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No I'm not frosty with you BoG, we all make mistakes and have our crosses to bear, I'm sure the huge guilt that you must carry to the grave will eventually be absolved after a very long and lengthy period of huge and distressing torment in purgatory (the mere thought of it gives me little pleasure). Rest assured, I will be at the golden gate to meet you after your centuries of distress and hell fire by pernicious daemons tearing at your flesh (which again give me little satisfaction). The Esparantos: Yes I thought it might be some secret society like that, I feel it is time I visited the pages of the guilt ridden and distressed to spread comfort and calm - It's the new me! where do I sign up? Giano | talk 18:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Byrne FAC

Excellent. Now all I have to do is wait for all the other voters to take you to task for being so rude to me. See, there's the horseshoe! Bishonen | talk 13:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]

People will understand the stress I am under having to deall with philistines who have no appreciation of art and beauty. Have you nothing better to do with your time, I'm sure some one wants banning somewhere. No if you will excuse me I am very busy! Giano | talk 13:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Happy Christmas.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Happy Christmas.gif. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 19:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read information provided with image upload. Thank you. Giano | talk 07:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gargleblaster

The Intergalactic Toilet Paper Holder is coming to get **you**! Bishonen

It is actually a goat food processor. Thanks. Giano | talk 07:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Byrne featured

Yet another triumph! :-) Bishonen | börk börk börk 11:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]

..........and thanks to all of you too for the help with the copyediting etc. You're not a bad bunch (no pun intended) really. Especially ALoan for the "footnote spectacular"! 16:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Your keep vote on Economics at WP:FARC

File:1000000eme.jpg

Another robot rolls off the conveyor belt, thanks you for your help, and excuses himself for a few days while he practices his new abilities. But Giano, really: "Reliable, competent, and level-headed" -- how do you come up with this stuff? -- a long way from Rousham 13:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Giano, could you please have a look at the Economics entry at FARC? I've asked you a question concerning your vote. Thanks! Mikker ^(...) 19:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the one seeking to alter the status quo you have two choices, either to argue your case, or not to argue your case. I can understand the article perfectly and am happy with it. - You seem to have chosen an opposing view. So you can either stand by your view, or you can edit the article to become even more comprehensive that it is at the moment. I look forward to your future editing and improvement of this already featured article. Giano | talk 19:33, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have replied... We seem to disagree :) Mikker ^(...) 20:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sanssouci

Just want to let you know I really like your helping hand on that article. It's getting better all the time. Really appreciate it. --Mmounties (Talk) 22:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no, no, no, no, no. I didn't mean that! I really think you're doing a bang-up job. I knew we weren't quite ready but one it's nominated more people look at it, and then someone like you comes around and help tremendously. And don't you stop until you're through! I really, really meant it when I said I appreciate your help. :) --Mmounties (Talk)

23:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ab-tholutely! (perhaps compfy, but never liked them either) --Mmounties (Talk)

23:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The message on Bish's page

I didn't revert it myself because it was quasi-official. Antifinnoug has named her as part of an RFAR, and he had to notify all named parties. Not that the RFAR is going to mean anything to Bishonen, of course, as it's going to go entirely against the person lodging it, who is just back from a year's block. Anyway, she's just one of a "gang" named, and I'd recommend to her anyway letting the others be primarily involved, as there isn't a whole lot to say about the guy that hasn't been said and proven before. Geogre 20:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protocol for nominating FARCs

Hi Giano

Do you think it's time to make an issue of the habit of nominating FAs for removal without giving the required notice on the talk page? I've raised this issue in relation to the most recently nominated article, Wigwag. What do you think? Tony 04:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is time, but it is also time to find some hard and fast rules for dealing with the FARC subject as a whole, of all Wikipedia's ill-thought out pages - FARC is probably the worst. If a page is found to be full of bad, or false information that should be a criteria for FARC. If there are no references whatsoever that should be also. English prose etc. would have all been checked at the original FAC and judged acceptable. If a page is considered by a nominator to be non-comprehensive, then in order to have made that judgement, they must be capable of adding it themselves, likewise with prose and grammar.

On the FARC page I think it sad that editors of no standing or proven ability whatsoever (No, I don't mean you and Taxman, or one or two others.) seem to spend their lives rummaging through old FAs just to nominate them for reasons which they imagine are adequate, in order for others with a similar lack of understanding to come and jump on the bandwagon with their own ill conceived opinions. What the answer is I'm not sure, left to me - only those who had produced an FA, and with 3000 edits would be eligible to nominate and pass comment (note: I do not say vote - which sadly is what half of them seem to think it is). That would not make a clique, as some claim, but an intelligentsia. There seems to be some sort of intellectual socialism here, which will if not checked will destroy the project.

Venceremos! À la lanterne les aristos! Bishonen

talk 13:28, 9 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]

At the moment I feel there is tendency here to belittle, rubbish, and destroy what exists, rather than to go forward and expand. That people choose to waste valuable editing time on attempting to bring down good accounts of a subject rather than improve, I find, frankly, rather sad. It is also unnecessarily unpleasant for the original editors of a page, who have already gone through the FAC process. I find it very hard to assume good faith when wondering what the frequent nominators are trying to prove with their nominations. If people wish to be thought intelligent here, there is a very easy way to prove it, and it can be found as a nominator, or even reviewer, on the FAC page rather than the FARC page. Giano | talk 11:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Giano, I'll have a look. I've never nominated a FARC myself, but I do think that despite the fact that some people abuse the process, it's part of the cost of having the FA system. Adherence to the 'give notice beforehand' rule might reduce the number of ingenuous nominations. (It might be hard to implement restrictions on nominators and/or reviewers on the FARC page, as much as that is a tempting prospect—in a way, the democratic inclusiveness of the project avoids a lot of potential problems and makes it much easier to administer.) Tony 12:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to jump in middle of conversation. But I fully agree that people should notify in the talk page with details about what is wrong with the article and give time for the editors to address the concerns. In the India FARC nomination, we have atleast one person who wants to remove the article because of a "tit-for-tat" reaction to a conflict with one of the Indian article editors over PRC article (he even admits it in the FARC nomination). Quite frustrating. --Blacksun 18:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the FARC page provides the perfect environment for score settling, with screams of "assume good faith" from those who know next to nothing about a page's history or, often, the subject itself. Personally, I don't understand why people want to hang out at the bottom end of the scale when the top end the - FAC page itself - is open to all. Well we shall just have to assume good faith ourselves as to the answer to that one.

I'll support it; really good article—as usual, the rich historical/cultural context in which architecture is discussed is fascinating. Tony 15:30, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet Another Giano on the Main Page

Hey, have you seen that Buckingham Palace is scheduled for the Main Page ? One of your most attractive pieces IMO. And just think how enriched it'll be with all the input it'll get on the day! :P Bishonen talk 14:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Little me

Tee hee, little me!

Signpost updated for April 10th

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 15	10 April 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: New weekly series
Power outage shuts down site for six hours	Introduction to a series: Looking forward to Wikimania 2006
Children's charity creates Wikipedia CD	News and Notes: Wikimania papers due soon, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

I read you like a book

Oh? You sound very full of yourself, did you request it or something? Bishonen | talk 09:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Eastern Europe

Lazienki is built on a scale of a Russian suburban villa, something like Kuskovo or Ostankino if you ask me. If you want a smart Eastern European park, you may want to check Summer Garden (and Summer Palace, Russia): it could benefit from your attention.

Among the more grandiose complexes, the recent activity of Sanssouci - which I have followed with interest - inspired me to expand Catherine Palace and initiate stubs on some of the structures in the park (Chinese Village, Marble Bridge, Dutch Admiralty, Chesme Column, Kagul Obelisk, Creaking Pagoda). Gatchina and Strelna have not seen a new word added for a year, since I and Wetman listed some basic facts. Pavlovsk and Oranienbaum, Russia [15] - two of the most remarkable palaces in Russia - still require even basic information. Yelagin Palace [16] and Tsaritsino are still on my to-do list.

Also, if you want baroque palaces outside Russia, you may want to check Mariyinsky Palace, Rundāle Palace, or Kadriorg (in Tallinn, no article yet). If you want a Renaissance chateau, there is plenty to say about Litomyšl, Niasviž Castle, and Mir Castle Complex. In a word, Wikipedia's coverage of Eastern European art leaves much to be desired and there are many objects you can choose from. Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo-Renaissance

If you are looking for something to do, Wikipedia still needs an article on Neo-Renaissance style. If you look at all the links going to that and other variants, you will see that it is requested:

u p p l a n d 09:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are not suggesting I become involved with another German translation [17]. Personally I've never regarded the neo-renaissance as a very interesting architectural style, (my view only) - I started a page on Mentmore Towers some time ago, and I see someone has just written Château de Ferrières so perhaps I'm being a little unfair to it. I'll do a few lines sometime, if no-one beats me to it. Giano | talk 13:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of it, and I don't mind it, really, but then we don't have that much real renaissance architecture in Sweden. (Or much real baroque or anything else. In fact, it's mostly pine forests with wild elks and heering up here.) I hadn't noticed the German article; it isn't very comprehensive but I suppose it could be used as a starting point. Maybe I'll do that myself some day. u p p l a n d 14:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please go on. The article is overdue, as is the article on Neo-Byzantine architecture and Russian Revival, which I plan to write myself some day. For the time being, your work inspired me to initiate Vladimir Palace. Happy edits, Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to write it, I was only trying to encourage some-one else, while I had five minutes to spare - I hate that style, it's always overpowering without the grace of the original - shall I put that on the page? Giano | talk 18:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there is some quotable critic who has written that, I think you should. At least you made that annoying red link go away. The most interesting thing about all the 19th century historic revival styles is probably the political role they played in different societies and nationalisms. More history than architecture, perhaps. u p p l a n d 19:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! but that is the secret of all architecture - it was always making a statement about its patrons, and still is, which is why I put so much about the occupants or patrons in my pages - subtle POV! Sadly my statement about overpowering rather than grace (I think refinement is a better English word) is less than subtle POV and all mine so better leave it out. Giano | talk 19:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A picture contrasting (to the left) the Nationalmuseum (opposite the Royal Palace in Stockholm) in "Italian Renaissance" style ("Florentine and Venetian" according to the official website, designed by Friedrich August Stüler, who also built the Neues Museum in Berlin), and the "Northern Renaissance" Nordic Museum (by Clason) in the background to the right.

Having read a little on this now, I am utterly confused. Not only does it seem difficult to draw a clear line between the earlier forms of neo-classicism and neo-renaissance, but many neo-renaissance architects appear to have been promiscuously eclectic and prepared to build in whatever style their clients wanted. I really need to read more on this to be able to write anything remotely coherent. On the whole, I doubt that Swedish neo-renaissance of the Italian type is very interesting or original in a larger European context, but there may be something to be said about the overlap of Swedish National Romanticism and revival of Northern Renaissance style, as in the Nordic Museum in Stockholm (by Isak Gustaf Clason). BTW, one Swedish architect often seen as a neorenaissancist, Fredrik Wilhelm Scholander (who was actually pragmatic at least in the superficial aspects of his architecture, being the architect behind the strange, "Assyrian"-style synagogue in Stockholm and various things in medieval styles), was a student in Paris of Louis-Hippolyte Lebas (1782-1867), where he became a friend of Charles Garnier. u p p l a n d 07:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the comment about the staircase. The building was designed by Bronisław Rogóyski and Stefan Szyller in the late 19th century. The design of the interior gave me the impression that the roof was indeed part of the original design, but I cannot confirm this (I would need to contact the university to find out what is the case, which I will time permitting). Here are some pictures:

Image:wut-interior.jpg
Image:wut-interior2.jpg
Image:wut-interior3.jpg
Image:wut-interior4.jpg
Image:wut-interior5.jpg
Image:wut-interior6.jpg
Image:wut-interior7.jpg
Image:wut-interior8.jpg
Image:Wut-interior9.jpg
Image:wut-exterior.jpg

--Vegalabs 06:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Warszawa_Lazienki4.jpg

Commons has a lot of images tagged with their specific template. The Commons template makes it more clear that the notification is a courtesy; we can't expect those mirrors which re-use our content without following the GFDL will track down some third party and write them a nice note. I'd feel pretty comfortable using the image without fear that it might be unexpectedly deleted. See also the Commons gallery of Warsaw Parks for more Łazienki Park images by them; the Polish article seems to be nothing but a gallery of those images. Jkelly 16:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was a conversation about these images at Commons, by the way. It turns out that the site just wants to know which of its images need to be re-licensed for us to use. Jkelly 22:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nice!

Giano—congrats on Sanssouci's promotion. I wasn't able to think of a better word than 'ethos'. :-) Tony 09:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just glanced at the article again and you're improvements are great! I agree as well with the removal of the slippers pic. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe it. I got back and it's "featured". Great job! ...and many, many thanks for taking it under your wing on that last stretch. :) --Mmounties (Talk)

05:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caserta

From images I have seen, the place is rather depressive. The Baroque in Italy was already dying when construction started. Most of the detail is imitative, original contributions being confined to the landscape and outbuildings such as Vanvitelli's aqueduct. Unfortunately, the integrity of landscape seems to have been compromised by the presence of modern constructions, see here. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 13:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo-baroque

I'm not an expert on architectural styles, and when I expanded the Neo-baroque article, I just moved a section on Neo-Baroque architecture from the Baroque article – where it did not really belong – to Neo-baroque, and padded it out with a diversity of buildings that were mentioned as being Neo-baroque in their own articles and had a picture there that (to my non-expert eye) did not look terribly unbaroquish. The Paris Opera example was moved across with the Neo-Baroque architecture section of Baroque.

If you think the exterior is a better illustration of the buildings's baroqueness, there is a an image here: Image:Palais_Garnier_bordercropped.jpg. Or else feel free to remove this as an example or replace it by a better one (in which case the present image of the interior could perhaps be used as an extra illustration for Palais Garnier). Judging from the images in their respective articles, several other examples also display Renaissance style elements, some perhaps more so than Baroque.

Since you asked my opinion: As a non-expert I already see a large diversity in style in "proper" Renaissance and Baroque architecture, but for these the period gives you an anchor. With "neo" styles you don't have such an anchor, and with the usual eclecticism in these styles all is rather vague, and it is hard to give a good example of a "typical" Neo-baroque building (excluding later copies of existing buildings), let alone a workable definition. And the fuzzier the boundaries, the more people like to argue over them. A similar problem exists for music: are the given examples not equally "neo-classicist"? Lambiam ^Talk 14:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! So what about "Ferrières and Mentmore sitting uncomfortably on top of an apartment block"? Can we do something with this image? I also found a more radical sample of Neo-Baroque approach. Please take a look at this picture. When do you think it was built? Check my stub about Beloselsky-Belozersky Palace to learn the answer. Cheers, Ghirla ^-трёп- 18:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ANZ Bank

Giano, Andypasto inserted the following into our (prematurely archived) discussion: "Guys, you've got the wrong building. The building above was demolished years ago and, as far as I am aware had nothing to do with Wardell. This is the one you want [18] - Venetian gothic, I think so. Andypasto 12:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)" I'm confused as to what Andypasto's interesting archival photo shows. Wardell? --00:21, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

template for advanced notice of FARC nominations

Hi Giano. Wondering what you think of my proposal at [19]. Tony 06:45, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message, anything that slows the process down, or makes it harder to defeature a page can only be a good thing. I have decided to ignore the FARC page completely, as it is bad for my blood pressure. I note your and Taxman's very worthy efforts together with Bishonen, ALoan and BoG's to instill some common sense there, but I have now taken that nasty little page off my watch list. With few exceptions it seems to be inhabited by editors distinguished only by their mediocrity, and pomposity, whose only raison d'être seems to be to pull down the hard work of others without attempting to produce anything in its place. I take the view that if one is capable of spotting a problem, one is also capable of fixing it. I wish you luck in what is a very unpleasant area of Wikipedia indeed. I am having nothing more to do with it, and if a page on which I have worked is nominated there, I shall continue to ignore it, and treat it with the contempt and disdain it desearves. Giano | talk 22:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I intend to post messages objecting to each nomination that has not been given the required warning. That's a start. Nominators should also specify the criteria by number, IMV. So let's make them go through the proper process, to start with. Tony 07:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo-Renaissance featured on Did You Know?

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Neo-Renaissance, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Signpost updated for April 17th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 16	17 April 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: Technical difficulties
BBC Focus renews encyclopedia comparisons	Media coverage of Wikipedia hoax results in article
Answers.com relationship scrutinized again upon release of tool	News and Notes: Anti-vandalism tool, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Disappeared Neo-baroque example

Hi. Since you had some interest in Neo-baroque issues, you might be able to help me by giving your opinion. When I fleshed out the Neo-baroque article, I included the State Theatre Košice as an example. Today User:Ghirlandajo removed the example, with edit summary rm fringe sample. Can you think of a reason why he might have done that? I am wondering if he did it just to annoy me, because I reverted another change of his to the article just before that. Lambiam ^Talk 20:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I know very little about Eastern European architecture, and tend to allow myself to be guided by Ghirlandajo who is very knowledgable on the subject. My experience of this user (I know he will read and see this) is that his edit summaries can be a little short and curt - and he could/should make them more polite. That though is his way and I don't think he means to be rude. He is not spiteful, and I doubt very much he did it to annoy you, or for revenge. He probably had a good reason for his edit and you should ask him, in my experience he is very earnest and fair in his explanations. Giano | talk 20:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lambiam, please assume good faith. I removed your image because the Kosice Theatre is, in my opinion, a poor example of Neo-Baroque, especially when compared to such regional gems as the opera theatre in Lemberg. By the way, Giano, I looked through St Pete-related websites and found some more examples which may pertain to the article you work upon: check [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27]. If you think one of these images may be used in Neo-Renaissance, I will try to find a free picture and start an article on the structure it represents. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Solar eclipse

Hi,

I thought you might want to take a look at my changes in Solar eclipse since you voted in the FA discussion.

Thanks, Nick Mks 14:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

It looks great on the Main Page. I'm sure HMQ will be logging on imminently to copyedit. -- ALoan (Talk) 00:50, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job again, Giano. HMQ.

Re: Second Empire

Your Boulevard Haussmann picture works fine for me. As for the Opéra, I was (mis)guided by the Britannica which considers the building as "one of the masterpieces of the Second Empire style" [28]. Check their entry on "Second Empire style" here. Alain Plessis in "The Rise and Fall of the Second Empire" reasons that "Charles Garnier mingled all genres for the Opéra, which remained unfinished and is in a sense the symbol of the Second Empire style characterized by Zola as an "opulent bastard of all styles"."

The Grove Dictionary of Art, which is usually more competent in such matters, claims that "The style became popular in the 1870s and 1880s for all types of secular building, from city halls and mansions to country cottages. Modelled after the New Louvre in Paris (1853–69) and typified by the Grosvenor Hotel, London (1860–62), and the State, War and Navy Building in Washington, DC (1871–86), it is characterized by mansarded pavilions, pedimented dormers and French Renaissance detailing.[29]

As for the US, I've got an impression that every mansarded ornate mid-19th-century building may be called "Second Empire" there: "The mansard roof... was a hallmark of the Second Empire style. By increasing headroom in the attic space, it provided an additional usable floor. To provide light on this floor, the mansard was almost always pierced with dormers. One of the first major Second Empire-style buildings in America was the Corcoran Gallery... Second Empire buildings featured prominent projecting and receding surfaces, often in the form of central and end pavilions. Ornamentation usually included classical pediments (frequently with sculpture groups), balustrades and windows flanked by columns or pilasters. Columns were usually paired and supported entablatures that divided the floors of the building. And there was always the mansard roof." (John C. Poppeliers, S. Allen Chambers. "What Style Is It: A Guide to American architecture")

In my corner of the world, such structures as Grand Hotel Europe, Stieglitz Museum, or Grand Hotel in Stockholm are usually described as "eclectic" and their style is dubbed "historicism", because it is hard to say which elements - Renaissance, Baroque, or Neoclassical - are given more prominence in any given building. Cheers, Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You asked me about Neo-Renaissance buildings in the New World. Although I don't know anything about the American architecture, I looked through Google Books and discovered — apart from the Boston Public Library — such structures as Colón Theater in Buenos Aires, Carnegie Hall, and Tweed Courthouse in New York City. Germania Building is reputed to have a purely Neo-Renaissance interior, but don't ask me about it. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 09:06, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think it would be wise and prudent to leave Second Empire to the Americans. It seems to have grown somewhat in the last 24 hours. In my part of the world an arts and crafts house with a tower that looks as though it belongs on Lego Land Town Hall is not Second Empire, neither is a Californian version of a Vampiric Castle. I have put in Neo-Renaissance that Second Empire is Neo-Renaissance with baroque embellishments, and that is as generous as I am prepared to be. To more important things, I want to write the real Renaissance style giving greater emphasis to the four directions that true Renaissance developed, so that the forms in which it took as Neo-Renaissance can be better explained. I've removed all reference to the Opera Garnier - A: because wetman thought it was stretching the category; and B: because it was confusing the issue. I won't have time to do too much today but hopefully over the week-end. I'll take a closer look at your images then, and we can do a North European section, or at least include some examples somewhere. Thanks for your help. Do you know how to add images properly. I want to put this one Image:Fredriksborg palace.jpg underneath Hardwick Hall, and then elaborate a little, but everytime I try, it either goes sideways or displaces the rest, even when I try to move the others upwards. I've run out of patience with it!!! Regards. Giano | talk 12:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Don't worry about the USA Images Wetman has supplied a very good one of a library in Boston - excellent!

Talking about Vampiric castles, take a look at the Red House in Port of Spain. The Britannica hails it as a purely Neo-Renaissance structure. Hmmm.... --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More German images

Dilapidated rural palazzi

I believe your idea about the conclusion is great. Many a time I would stroll familiar streets of my native city and recognize the 19th-century neo-Renaissance or (more often) the purest neo-Baroque in some dusty 19th-century mansion. What a pity I'm too lazy to photograph all that!.. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seaton Delaval Hall

I've put some pictures on. Perhaps too many. Have a look. Feel free to criticise and/or change what I've done. AWhiteC 13:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Mail. Bishonen | talk 15:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks

Thanks foe your nice words in Kolkata FAC. In fact, do check out the page after a few days. We are planning to upload two new images. One, a new colour image of the "Coffe House" adda in the "culture" section, replacing the present B&W one. I have got hold of that image, now waiting for proper licesnse/ permission from the phorographer.

Another image we have plan to upload is an image of a newspaper stall in the street of Kolkata. This image would be placed in "Utility service and media" section (which does not have any image now). Hope we shall be able to further enhance the article by images and inputs by all the wikipedians. Thanks a lot. Bye.--Dwaipayanc 18:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for April 24th

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 17	24 April 2006	About the Signpost

Confusion over office actions as veteran contributor briefly blocked	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
Author threatens to sue, deemed unfit as source	Proposal to pay editors for contributions
News and Notes: Alexa rank, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

More dilapidated buildings

Although I'm kind of prejudiced against post-Petrine architecture in my own town, your images of Leighton Buzzard put me to shame and inspired me to perform similar feats. Today I had to go to a very intresting market and decided that it would be mean to steal this precious time from Wikipedia. So I took a camera with me and made some photos of late 19th-century architecture which I saw in my way. When you live in the centre of a World Heritage Site (as I do), you tend to think that it's easy to find samples of all the architectural styles within your daily walk. Unfortunately, sun, scaffolding, and traffic were invariably against me. If you take a look at the pictures which I posted today here, you will get a new meaning of the word "dilapidation". Don't be too scared though, many other buildings look so much worse that I didn't dare to photograph them at all. All these buildings date to the period between 1864 and 1912, with the exception of two bright red mansions: they are 18th century. P.S. Thanks for editing House of Croy. It was written back in December, simultaneously with La Tour d'Auvergne, but then I got busy with real life and quite forgot about this lengthy and boring text until yesterday. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 19:06, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just for fun, compare Ghirlandajo's image here from Yaroslavl with this building in Uppsala. u p p l a n d 19:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And my guess is that one is not very old .........correct? This page is growing and growing like Topsy - I have to a large re-write of the proper Renaissance section - if only the txt were as easy to find as the fotos! Giano | talk 20:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Uppsala building is designed in 1881. u p p l a n d 20:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well some you win some you don't - we hadn't bet had we? The serious problem here is what to include and what to leave out - I honestly don't know at the moment. I would like to develop the Scandinavian side, but that is heavily influenced by the Dutch which would mean a whole section on the Flemmish and so on, but there has to be a Flemmish section anyway (I fear). I have learnt more writing this page than any other I have ever done - there is also quite a strong Austrolasian section which needs to be in there too. I'm going to have a few days thinking about it, I do wish I had started it in User:Space as that would have given me more time to think - Oh well too late for that now - it's up and running. All advice, edits gratefully received. Giano | talk 20:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I wouldn't have expected you to consider 1881 very old. In fact, I think this particular style more or less went out of fashion during the 1880s, although other types of Neo-Renaissance lived on, partly a more Northernly one, as well as eventually Art Nouveau, and various difficult-to-describe eclectic styles, and (most significantly) a stronger emphasis on natural materials rather than stucco and paint (Clason is the most important representative of that in Sweden, but you can see it already in the main university building in Uppsala, which was completed in 1887).

Generally speaking, I think the point should be to include the seminal buildings or some famous and representative ones, but without missing the domestic neo-renaissance (including the interior style). That probably means focusing on Italy, France, Germany (and perhaps the Netherlands). Swedish architect traveled to those counries to study, and I expect architects from Russia did the same. I don't know if any Swedish buildings are really that significant, but I would think the Nordic Museum is a good example of Northern Renaissance used in a very national project. Just outside the gates of the Museum is a statue of Charles X Gustav with an inscription mentioning all the names of the generals participating in the crossing of the Great Belt in 1658, which led to the victory over Denmark and the Treaty of Roskilde in which Denmark had to secede half its territory to Sweden. Just where one comes in to the Museum, there is a giant statue of Gustavus Vasa, the founder of the Early Modern Swedish state, who made Sweden independent of the Kalmar Union, dominated by Denmark. It is perhaps ironic that the closest real Renaissance analogy I know of the Museum is Frederiksborg Palace in Denmark... (although I couldn't write that without checking if somebody else has made the same observation before, as it would be original research). Östgöta nation (the yellow Uppsala building), on the other hand, seems to be more run-of-the-mill neo-renaissance, with similar buildings probably existing all over Europe (Yaroslavl, for instance), and with no particular national or historic significance beyond the common admiration and assimilation of the classical tradition of architecture that was by then an unreflected and obvious part of any European tradition of culture or Bildung.

As for the Nationalmuseum, it is actually rather atypical - few buildings in the middle of the century were built entirely of visible stone, most (of those which were not simply wood) were constructed in bricks covered by stucco and paint. And it is designed by a foreign architect; I am not aware of Stüler building anything else in Sweden. u p p l a n d 21:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well we have Frederiksborg Palace already in the main Renaissance section, waiting for me to start pontificating about it's Flemmish renaissance origins, and then bringing in the similarities to the Nordic Museum. You see I do have a grand plan, it's just not very evident at the moment. It's also very dependent on buildings I can easily photograph as I know the aspects I want to emphasise. The little known provincial buildings of little worth are the ones I want to highlight as they "are" the style as most people understand it, also as most people see it - so pointing out the architectural merits of a Wikipedia-editor's daily baker's shop to the Palazzo Farnese is the best way to explain a subject. So keep an eye out when you next go shopping in the provinces! Giano | talk 21:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

House of C

I know, I know... The whole website is replete with apocryphal info which has little bearing to the noble family. The Croys always touted themselves as the only extant line of the House of Arpad, although the Drummonds of Scotland have claimed the same. I think there is no reason to give credit to any on these claims. Cheers, Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mistress

Please understand I'm not trying to be difficult at all, but I really don't understand why misstress can't be linked to intimate relationship. Sex is a part of intimacy, as well as the fact that sex does not absolutely have to be involved. Feel free to change it tho if you can link to something you feel is more appropriate. I apologize if I've offended you. It seems I might have. I'm not saying adultery is a good thing, but a relationship between a man and his mistress is certainly intimate. --Brian1979 21:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brian. You have not offended me at all, beyond the fact I cannot bear mealy mouthed bourgeois phrases. One can have a purely platonic intimate relationship with one's best friend regardless of their sex or one's sexual orientation - It is the person one is closest too in terms of confidences. A Mistress (in the context of the edits you have mad) is a Sexual partner , that is unchallengeable fact. That I think is your mistake. Giano | talk 21:23, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Am I wrong? This is the definition of intimate:

Intimate adj.

Marked by close acquaintance, association, or familiarity.
Relating to or indicative of one's deepest nature: intimate prayers.
Essential; innermost: the intimate structure of matter.
Marked by informality and privacy: an intimate nightclub.
Very personal; private: an intimate letter.
Of or involved in a sexual relationship. <-

I chose intimate relationship because a)it's mentioned on the disambiguation page and b) relationships with mistresses are, by definition, long term. Otherwise the sexual aspect would be a fling or just sex. Isn't it reasonable to assume that a long term relationship is intimate?--Brian1979 22:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The things I have to do for this encyclopedia! Mistress Giano | talk 10:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great job on Mistress (lover). I liked it so much, I bought you this barnstar! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re the whole de-bureaucrating thing

Hi, I never came to thank you for the message you left for me a month ago when I stepped down from being a bureaucrat. Thank you for the things you said, it's good to know there are still plenty of good people about in this project. I do not see myself standing for bureaucrat again anytime soon though who knows what the future may bring! Thank you once again. -- Fr a ncs2000 09:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS I still haven't forgotten that article!

Userspace

Hey, Giano! I moved your newly created page, User Giano:19th century architecture to User:Giano/19th century architecture. Pages in your user namespace should follow this format to allow easy identification and to make sure the "parent" links work. Cheers, Tangot a ngo 10:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Damn Giano

you've got more hardware hanging around you than . . . . . . ...... Hermann Wilhelm Göring. But that's not why I came. The pictures of Waddesdon is fine, it certainly persents a lot of the issues that we have to deal with. The only problem with the pictures is . . . . well while I like leftist leanings in politics I'm less clear about them in photography. I tried playing around with both those pictures but when I rotate them, something wierd happens. like only vertical lines rotate, horizontal ones stayhorizontal. Now in America i'd be tempted to call that Chateauesque - but we'll get into that later. To me the shot is a keeper. Carptrash 21:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

If we do not want to get lost in all these revivals, I believe a navigational template is a must. I suggested one possible layout on your other page. Having added Indo-Saracenic and Regency style (I guess it's another name for the Empire, though), I now think about listing Stripped classicism of the late 19th-century too (this term is requested among Wikipedia's missing articles). P.S. Take a look at Dolmabahçe Palace (1856) - what do you think it should be classified as? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 22:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Have you seen Victorian house and Painted ladies? I'm not sure how they fit in. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 06:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dolmabahçe Palace

I fully agree with your characteristic. The palace was built simultaneously and probably shares some features with Ortaköy Mosque and Çırağan Palace. I wonder whether we should include Turkish Beaux-Arts extravaganzas into our template under a separate heading, something like Balyan Style. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 1st.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 18	1 May 2006	About the Signpost

Campaign manager resigns over Wikipedia edit	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
Assorted honors for Jimmy Wales	News and Notes: 4 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Châteaux of Crimea

Hello, I still don't understand what they mean by Chateauesque. I dared to illustrate the article with an image of Massandra. Can you tell me whether it fits into the category? Also, please take a look at Swallow's Nest. When I visited this mansion years ago, we were told that its model was Belém Tower in Lisbon. Now when I look at it again I think that Scottish baronial influences predominate here. What do you think? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, your amazon link doesn't work for me and I'm still in the dark as to the book you read years ago. I agree that chateauesque is better deleted or imported to Wikidictionary (if the Americans really use the term). It was so foolish of me not to think about Ludwig's follies in relation to the Swallow's Nest (by the way, this link leads to Swiftlet). You may be surprized to learn that the structure is cast in Russian movies about England, for example it is the setting of the film version of And Then There Were None. Quite silly, but it seems to suit the Russian stereotype of what English architecture should look like... --Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The template lists revivals only, you see. As to Arts and Crafts movement, I'm not sure under which heading to place it. Which historic style did they revive? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Placenames

Seen this ? Bishonen | talk 09:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Talk:Accademia dell' Arte del Disegno

Giano, can you help us? How embarrassing that I'm not sure. --Wetman 20:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honorifics

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Campaign_to_force_the_use_of_honorifics. Thanks Arniep 11:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

== Lubyanka ==

File:PetersburgSt.jpg

What style is it?

Giano, I liked your extended appraisal of the architectural derivation of Schusev's work. I have two other toughies for you - Gare du Nord and Gare d'Orsay. I almost added these two under Beaux-Arts heading, but then thought that I'd better consult an expert. :) --Ghirla ^-трёп- 19:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gare d'Orsay I think we shall have to concede toBeaux arts and Gare du Nord a very Palladian themed piece of Neoclassical Architecture, I don't know why, it reminds me of Easton Neston [30] which is English Baroque - but I have no justifiable reason for thinking that, the two have few if any similarities, just the segmented windows, broken pediments and fluted columns. It's just a feeling I have. Giano | talk 20:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, having just spent two hours in a train, my poor mind still runs on those railway stations. The railway station was an important piece of Victorian architecture; most innovative architectural solutions were implemented there; and many railway termini were designed to impress. Now, what do you make of Nicholas Train Station? I was going to suggest it for your article about Italianate things, but then Russian guides say it is Neo-Byzantine. Still, take a look at the tower and fenestration. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 23:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 8th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 19	8 May 2006	About the Signpost

New worldwide rankings show Wikipedia strength outside US	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
News and Notes: Milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

== Twin stations ==

File:Kremlin armoury.jpg

Another Thon building for Giano — Kremlin Armoury.

More interestingly to me why are all the stations the same - do you only have one design in your Notherly world for stations?

Because the Moscow-Saint Petersburg Railway was the first major railway in the Russian Empire and tsar Nicholas asked his favourite architect Thon to design identical termini for it in Moscow and St Petersburg. Therefore, if you go from Moscow to St Petersburg or the other way - like Anna Karenina did - you will find yourself in the middle of very similar architecture when boarding the train and when dismounting. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 12:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo-Byzantine vs. Neo-Renaissance

I can't agree with you about the Saviour Monastery in Polotsk; Thon's cathedral is a grander version of a typical Palaiologoi church. As for the rest... To be sure, we know what the Byzantine churches looked like but what is your idea of Byzantine residential architecture, with authentic evidence of Byzantine palaces being so sparse? Is it something Gothic-Venetian like the National Academy of Design? Or is it a compilation of elements taken from the Byzantine ecclesiastical architecture? In Russia, the term is usually reserved for residential architecture reminiscent of Thon's Grand Kremlin Palace. I trust you more than casual writers in Russian or any other language who assume that everything designed by Thon was either Russian-Byzantine or Neo-Byzantine. Let's categorize those railway stations as Italianate. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 13:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, I liked your definition of Russo-Byzantine-Rococo. Back in the 1830s, people had a very vague idea of what "Byzantine architecture" stood for. Much of the ornamentation they called "Byzantine" was in fact generated by their fantasy. It so happens that this quite unhistorical style is known as Russo-Byzantine or Byzantine-Russian in the history of architecture. As for the windows of the Grand Kremlin Palace, I believe they were imitated from the Terem Palace, which adjoins the Grand Palace but was constructed in the 1630s for the first Romanov tsar. Such Italinate elements penetrated Russia at the turn of the 16th century and earlier, when such architects as Aristotile Fioravanti, Marco Ruffo, Pietro Antonio Solari, and Aloisio the New were active in Moscow. They used order system in such structures as the Archangel Cathedral (1505), which was widely imitated throughout Russia, probably even before classical orders were introduced to England. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GAs

Well, I didn't know that GAs existed until the other day! I think it's undersupervised, and I suspect there's a lot of undistinguished material that is now graced with this badge. On another matter, I think that the present FARC system might work well if properly enforced. Who knows what disorganisation awaits us if Raul goes ahead and merges it with the review process? Tony 05:17, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shopping malls

From railway stations to shopping malls... Now we have to categorize the offspring of Burlington Arcade, such as Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II, The Passage, Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert, and several similar structures in Paris. Category:Second Empire architecture doesn't seem to be relevant here. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 10:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 15th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 20	15 May 2006	About the Signpost

Publicity surrounds Chinese site reusing Wikipedia content	German chapter prevails in Tron appeal
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Time 100 Gala, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

== World Heritage ==

So the great categorising is on a hold for a few days.

Please come back soon. In the meantime, I plunged into my seasonal World Heritage frenzy (it usually predates the announcement of new patrimonies inscribed each year). So far, I started pitiful stubs about Residences of the Royal House of Savoy, Kromeriz Castle, Valtice, Sophia Cathedral and set out expanding Wieskirche and Dessau-Wörlitz Garden Realm. I'm afraid I shall veer towards the medieval sites, such as Santa Maria de Guadalupe, in the ensuing days. But when this is over, I promise to post a large article about Russian Revival which I completed last weekend. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 12:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great

If that doesn't get her/him to stick around, nothing will. Let them go silently into the night. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 22nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 21	22 May 2006	About the Signpost

Project statistics updated, except for Wikipedia	Deletion of metadata icons debated
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia chapters report, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Thank you

For [31], although I am embasrassed to confess that I have been scattering bits of knock-em-dead comedy about the place recently, so I am not entirely positive which edit of mine garnered the award. Possibly [32]? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth is a "cowboy-builder"? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 29th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 22	29 May 2006	About the Signpost

Semi-protection tweaks prompt debate over ideals	Wikipedia administrator investigated after on-wiki dispute
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Request for your feedback

Hi Giano

Because a few nominators of FACs have appeared to need/desire a formal explanation of how they can improve their prose, I had the idea of writing an article dedicated to this purpose. It would be a complement to Taxman's and Jengod's articles, and "Great writing" and "The perfect article". I wonder whether you'd mind having a look at it and letting me know what yout think, in terms of the overall concept and the effectiveness and appropriateness of the training aspect. I've completed only the introduction and the first area, "Redundancy", for which there are about 30 exercises. The remainder is just a messy paste-in of notes.

I don't want to continue until I have other people's opinions on the approach.

Thanks

Tony 05:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, Giano. Yes, I realised that a 'rider' is necessary, briefly stating that authorities disagree about some aspects of style. Tony 09:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Petersburg City Duma

Hello, I need your opinion on the categorization of Saint Petersburg City Duma and Rotes Rathaus. Should they go to Category:Italianate architecture? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should run one of your civic improvement projects

Barton in the Beans. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

I am only staying until We Belong Together passes FAC. After that, it is goodbye. Don't ever post your nonsense on my talk page again. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh!.......here to stay permanently then. Giano | talk 19:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. The writing requires some patching up on, and that's really it. There are no other objections. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Dear, if that passes FAC it will be because people are anxious to see the back of you, in fact I may even vote support myself. Oh that would be funny wouldn't it if every one trooped out and voted support, whatever would you do next - I'm half of a mind to find out. Giano | talk 19:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good then. Makes my life easier; I don't really give a damn what your real intentions are. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I think you do, or you wouldn't keep popping back here. Now, be a good girl, and shove off. Giano | talk 19:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I think I don't. Also, I don't see any girls anywhere. :) —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Praise for the praiseworthy...

[33] -- ALoan (Talk) 21:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for June 5th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 23	5 June 2006	About the Signpost

New revision-hiding feature added	Paper profiles Wales, slams Wikipedia business coverage
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	New external tools
News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Image:Goat.gif

Hello, Giano archive 4 (2006). An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Goat.gif) was found at the following location: User talk:Giano archive 4 (2006). This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SicilyFlag.gif

Image:SicilyFlag.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[ALoan_p.21-1] ALoan, 2006, p.21

[ALoan_p.22-2] ALoan, 2006, p.22

[1]

[2]