User talk:Wetman/archive28Dec2007

Please click here to leave me a new message.

This grackle has spotted you and is very pleased with your work! For having a thought provoking user page, filled with valuable instructions and examples that obviously show in the quality of your edits, I award you this Great-tailed Grackle! --User:Unfocused, 27 September 2005

To the most helpful, prolific and competent wikipedian I've met during my two years in the project. Presented by Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Archived:

User talk:Wetman/archive3Mar2004

User talk:Wetman/archive16Jun2004

User talk:Wetman/archive12Aug2004

User talk:Wetman/archive16Oct2004

User talk:Wetman/archive15Jan2005

User talk:Wetman/archive22Mar2005

User talk:Wetman/archive23Jun2005

User talk:Wetman/archive3Sep2005

User talk:Wetman/archive1Dec2005

User talk:Wetman/archive28Mar2006

User talk:Wetman/archive3July2006

User talk:Wetman/archive15Oct2006

User talk:Wetman/archive7Feb2007

User talk:Wetman/archive25Jun2007

User talk:Wetman/archive10Aug2007

		The DYK Medal
		I, Smee, hereby award Wetman with The DYK Medal. For your multitude of Did you know? contributions to the project, the community thanks you. Smee 23:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

CURRENT & NEW TALK

On 23 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Appalachian balds, Hermes Fastening his Sandal, Old Connecticut Path, Giovanni Duprè, Giuseppe Maggiolini, Edict of Châteaubriant, Edict of Compiègne, Royal Entry, Solarium Augusti, Danel, Women's Rest Tour Association, Reccopolis. Apaliunas, François Massialot, Abbey of Condat, John Parkinson (botanist), Gamaliel King, Tomé Pires, Lord Uxbridge's leg, Waldalenus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Parry Evans/Rhos Fynach

Indeed I am, Robert Parry Evans (born 1806) & Mary Hughes were my great-great grandparents. I added some material to the Rhos on Sea article because I had just 'met' another cousin via the web, who had provided some leads (though some of the sources are contradictory, eg about the fishing weir). I have enabled 'email to user' if you'd like to send me an email contact -- I'm interested to know more about your links, and I have some info on the history of the family if you'd like to have copies. Regards, Rexparry sydney 11:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Peutingerian Map: longitude and latitude

Hello,

Longitude is the East-West geographic coordinate measurement and latitude is the North-South. Do you agree?

On the Peutingerian map, from North to South, for instance from the latitude of Dubris (Dover) to the latitude of Rusucurru (Dellys or Tigzirt, North Africa) the distance is about 19 centimeters. West-East, from the longitude of Gerunda (Girona) to the longitude of Muziris (Cranganore = Kodungallur, India) the distance is about 670 centimeters. So, I would say the the North-South distances are compressed.

Best regards

A mild response to this anonymous post from User:Euratlas can be seen at Talk:Tabula Peutingeriana.--Wetman 19:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mr Wetman, I'm preparing an online version of the Tabula Peutingeriana (with ÖNB authorization). Here is the beta-version http://www.euratlas.net/cartogra/peutinger/index.html I hope that the problem of latitude/longitude appears on the map comparison. Best regards ___ Christos Nüssli <[email protected]> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Euratlas (talk • contribs) 21:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Drowning!

I followed your suggestion, now you have 3 for the price of one! [1] I suppose the page will have to be called "The Cisterni of Livorno" although following the dabacle concerning the naming of that unfortunate, vulgar and garishly coloured church in Firenze it may be demanded that to please the MOS and the various naming conventions the page is called "Leghorn's Tanks". Whatever, if you have any ideas or knowledge on the subject please add them to the page, as my inspiration and limited knowledge is now running dry (pardon the pun)- are any other buildings so little documented? Fascinating subject though - I feel a real page on 19th century temples of Industry could be quite interesting. Regards Giano 21:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

O brilliant, Giano! You seem to be back on track! I thought that image would draw you in. I'll reread it now, tweaking as I go; of course you'll delete any tweaks that aren't improvements. There's one idea I take exception to: "an asthetically considered approach to the design of utilitarian buildings which had not been known peviously." I think you're overlooking conscious architectural features of Luigi Vanvitelli's Lazzaretto, and Carlo Fontana's granaries at Termini for Clement XI. Are there some grand architectural features in utilitarian structures at the Arsenal of Venice? Hospitals have such a long architectural history they should be specifically disclaimed as not included. I'm ignorant here, but I think you need to suggest that there's a prehistory to this field, of non-military architecturally conscious utilitarian European public works that are not merely window-dressing. --Wetman 22:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. No you are right, I was phrasing what I meant badly - I meant for the first time the "Utopian" architecture was supposed the uplift the souls of not only the passer-by but also those of the wretches who laboured within rather than cower and overpower them with monumantal masonry intended to glorify the municipalities and dignitries who controlled such establishments. Now I know I have read this theory, the problem is where as it needs to be cited! any suggestions? Giano 06:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Quite different, I see, though the prehistory of industrial architecture does provide background for these structures. You'd be looking for thoughts on the uplifting and character-forming role of architecture in the works of Jeremy Bentham and the innovations at New Lanark, and among Owenites, and Saint-Simoniens, then? You see I'm not of much help.--Wetman 06:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

You are always a great help but I may be barking up the wrong tree as there seems to be no evidence that Signor Poccianti was a great philosopher of avant-garde communist. I shall apply my usual motto "if in doubt leave it our" Giano 07:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Historia naturalis palmarum

[2] Hey, you don't need my approval! Thanks. —Moondyne 08:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Just when you've finished the presentable version, to have me come tweaking at it... well, I'm glad you feel it's tighter and snappier, with fewer unnecessary words.--Wetman 08:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Wrotham Park

If you are interested, i have partially sorted out this mess of an article and moved the Queensland attraction to Wrotham Park Lodge, whilst the other is under Wrotham Park, Barnet. Simply south 16:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellently done!--Wetman 16:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Who Is?

T.E. Shaw ???? IP4240207xx 16:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

A pseudonym of T.E. Lawrence, known to you as "Lawrence of Arabia", under which he joined the Royal Tank Corps in 1923. Why do you ask me?--Wetman 18:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

AC/DC, no, I mean AD/BC.

Hello, Wetman. Yes, I was spared the decision. The whole idea of social engineering through warping the English language is a real hot button for me. I think it's stupid, and I hate it, and people who go in for it are foisting their religio-political agenda on us like Nazis. That said, I can also see that if I'm going to contend that it doesn't matter if I want to use the traditional system, then I shouldn't care if somebody wants to use the new one. The thing is, whatever euphemistic abbreviation we use, the fact remains that the dividing line is the birth of Jesus of Nazareth of Bible fame, so everybody is happy but me. If the abbreviation signified the date on which the Buddha's mother was impregnated by an elephant, that would be of academic interest only, and I wouldn't care, so why do they? Makes you go "Hmmmm". Anyway, all I'm doing at Mycenae is pumping up my French muscle for fun. I never translated anything so erudite before, and it feels good. I hope I'm not screwing it up too bad. I expect to go back and copyedit after I've translated the whole thing from French Wikipedia, but I could use help. You can't look at anything so long and not go a little cross-eyed. It's nice to see somebody else is in there. --Milkbreath 23:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a good thing my note was so polite... being that I was misinformed and all... BCE is what one reads in archaeology articles nowadays. "Anno Domini 2007" does have a Reverend Lovejoy ring to it. I try to "Avoid unnecessary interference" according to my rule: do let me vet your translation at Mycenaean Greece after you've finished up. And there may be more statements that could be supported with refs. or even quotes. --Wetman 23:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

While we're talking about it, it just occurred to me that the French page sort of runs a macro at the beginning, saying that all dates are B.C. (or whatever...jeeze) unless otherwise noted. You seem to have obsessive experience here; is that done? And, yes, there is not a single footnote. --Milkbreath 00:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

If I've had truly Bolshy resistence, I sometimes use the "comment out" html <!--This article has used the ABCD convention since (whenever)--> at the topmost line of html. But it shouldn't be pushed on the visible page, and probably it shouldn't be pressed at all. I just dislike having anything forced at me. Or furtive changes made under the guise of "editing". Footnotes are a fetish of Wikpedia's Lisa Simpsons: I find footnoted quotes useful to introduce familiar concepts that would be challenged by the ill-lettered. A form of ventriloquism. --Wetman 00:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The Grange

Fruit with that cocktail anyone?

I can't find a wiki article for Pugin's The Grange.[3] Is it known by another name or should we conclude there isn't one? --Joopercoopers 13:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Pugin? - nasty old man, pure house of horror never knew when to stop all those curls and spirettes, not surprised he ended up in the madhouse. Now here is a page you may care to contribute to. Giano 13:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes but in its planning, with a scant regard for symmetry, it's often seen as a precursor to the modernist idea of a free/open/functionalist plan - a nice paradox. --Joopercoopers 13:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Planning? planing call that planning disorganized mayhem - "a tidy mind is a happy mind" as I say to my children. Giano 13:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm beginning to think you're not a fan - and he a good catholic boy too who worked himself to death for the faith. --Joopercoopers 14:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Convert! - always the worst, all that genuflecting is very bad for the knees. Giano 14:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't think of many architects who have built themselves a special watch tower to look out for wrecks, the salvage of which, might supplement their income. Surely such eccentricities strike a chord Giano? --Joopercoopers 15:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

JC (excuse me Wetman) he was barking mad! Giano 16:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I read with some mirth "As a man, Pugin was passionate, intense, impatient, combative and funny"[4] - projection methinks :-) --Joopercoopers 16:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I feel as if I've come home to find cocktails already in full progress. No article on Grange House, Ramsgate, designed for himself by A.W.N. Pugin, 1850. Isn't it Grange House rather than The Grange? with so many Granges at Wikipedia (more if you search "Grange"), the addition of "Ramsgate" might be good. Alas I'm so dependent on Colvin, who includes the elder Pugin but not the famous one, that I can't fully engage in the pillowfight. Giano I see has been as productive as ever.--Wetman 20:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah Wetman, cocktails indeed, thank you for the edits on Villa Duodo such an acomplished architectural masterpiece not a curl or a spirette in sight more of a dry "fino" than the Harvey Wallbanger that poor old JC wants to write about. Giano 22:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Giano, fixing a pesky redlink at Villa Duodo has opened a new can of worms, Rocca (architecture), a poor stub that needs all our help: this includes you, Gentle Reader. --Wetman 00:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Not just Italia I seem to remember coming upon one here at Prince's Palace of Monaco. Would be a very big subject though to do properly. Giano 07:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

...roche, as in La Roche-Guyon. --Wetman 07:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Circulades

There must be an instructive urbanistic history embedded in the quarter-concentric layout of this commune of apparently traditional construction materials in the département Aude of Roussillon. You, Gentle Reader, may know enough to give this illustration, which I found wandering about lost at Commons, a revealing article.I would, if I had a clue... Ah! circulades! --Wetman 04:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you look at the etymology in Lusitania?

Hello Wetman. I noticed you editing some of the etymology at Lugus. Could you take a look at the last few changes to Lusitania (since 10 August)? New etymology that is added without references makes me nervous, unless it is easily checkable from dictionaries. See if it looks OK to you. Thanks, EdJohnston 00:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, very chancy, I agree. I moved some text to Talk:Lusitania awaiting some sources: there must be some published modern analysis of Lusitania that could be quoted instead. The syllogism etymology:scholarship::pun:humor seems to hold true. --Wetman 05:20, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Little Dunmow

I note that you added some detail to the Little Dunmow site. Thanks. Somewhere along the way the correct Note 1 to the history section has been lost. The reference is http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=39845 I am not well enough versed in handling Wikipedia to replace it - would you do the honours please? If the removal was a matter of copyright should it remain as a printed ref rather than a link? Oldsoldier38 16:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello and thank you! In the footnote, which the reader reaches by clicking on the Note 1, if the reader clicks again on the highlighted text in the actual note, they'll be taken to the website in question. Check the html technique for this by clicking Edit this page. (Don't let me sound like a knowledgeable pro at this stuff, because I'm really not.) --Wetman 19:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Pelasgian

They deleted most of the Albanian-Pelasgian case, no nationalist Greek would let that happened.Some are blind but some are not.Anyways any help is more than welcomed.Thank you.--Taulant23 01:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Valois tapestries

Thanks for your comments and excellent edits. I've only dipped into the mysteries of the tapestries so far and hope to improve the article over time. I must look further to see if I can find more clues about who was precisely behind the tapestries, because I agree with you, now I come to think about it, that de Heere himself couldn't have dictated the content (even so, Yates, whose theories are flamboyant, quotes a poem by him, castigating Charles IX).

My own (original research) hypothesis, so far, is that the tapestries were first planned in the early seventies and were put aside for some reason, perhaps cash, perhaps the wars, perhaps the massacre; when Anjou intervened on the side of the Flemish rebels, I suspect that the towns were moved to express their gratitude in the currency they knew best, tapestry, and revived the old project, adapting it to the new political circumstances. Like most of my theories, this one will probably have to stay inside my head, of course.qp10qp 23:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you about the timing. My impression is that except for commonplace work like "verdures", there is always a patron, whose interventions feed the weavers. The iconography of the finished tapestries suggests a patron in the immediate circle of Catherine de Medici, who was the real power and font of patronage in the court of the adolescent Henri III. And Miss Yates must be right in that they were destined as a gift to Catherine herself, since they turned up at the court of Tuscany. Miss Yates' identification of William of Orange as the patron must be the reason for saying Brabant and not adding "or Paris". --Wetman 23:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a question about your warning

Hey there!

I received a message from you warning me about vandalism, and I just wanted to double check with you. The only edit I had done to the Renaissance Humanism article was expand "Pico" to "Pico della Mirandola" right before an excerpt of his Oration on the Dignity of Man, as I felt those who were only reading this particular section of the article might be confused. Take a look at the comparitive histories:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Renaissance_humanism&diff=156829333&oldid=156823955

You obviously know more about editing than I do, is this some kind of taboo? If you could please let me know, I don't want to continue doing whatever it is,

Thanks!

-Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.207.124.174 (talk) 01:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Both Pico and Pico della Mirandola are correct. What I undid from the article was "This is a lie a lie see i can edit this page a LIEEE". Correctly noted as "babble" in my edit summary. Try your sensible edit again: it doesn't appear in red, as deleted, in my diff. --Wetman 01:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, haha I can see now what you meant by vandalism! :) this, however was not me. Take a look at the edit before mine:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Renaissance_humanism&diff=156823955&oldid=156188051

This was done by 69.76.130.76, who you, in fact, blamed for the "babble" in your edit summary in the first place. Just a misunderstanding, thanks for your time!

Ah! my concerns for schizophrenia are calmed! You can sign and date-stamp your posts with four tildes, like this: --Wetman 02:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Again, thanks! still getting the hang of everything 'round here.. --71.207.124.174 02:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Arion

No big disagreements about your edits to Arion (mythology), and some needed cleanup, so thanks for that; however:

• Are you sure the information about Arion from the Bibliotheca comes from its epitome rather than from the books of the Bibliotheca that we do have? and
• What's up with the wording "traditionally ascribed to Apollodorus"? Why use that kind of language when the author of the Bibliotheca is known well not to be Apollodorus of Athens and is in scholarship referred to as the Pseudo-Apollodorus? It just strikes me a bit like editing the article on lightning and stating in the lead that its cause is "traditionally ascribed to Zeus's anger".
• See my response to your note re: the title of the article. I think it is more appropriate as it is.

Cheers and thanks, Robert K S 07:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I decided to Be Bold and get rid of the epitome "twaddle" myself. Then I noticed that you had done so as well just before I had! Robert K S 07:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I do try to follow my own advice. Really I do! Follow that theoi.com link: what a useful site!-Wetman 07:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It is very useful--all the citations in one place. Great find! BTW, the thing that bothers me most in the present version of the article is the color of Arion's mane. Most of the English translations I've found say dark or black. The French stuff I was translating from said green. Then another source says red. I gave up. Robert K S 08:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Why not put "green" into a footnote with the French translation that introduces "green" and call it in the article "dark-maned" or "black-maned", more closely following your sources. One of the elaborate later Latin sources gives the horse a fiery mane, conflating it with other fiery steeds. --Wetman 08:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Architectural photography

Giano travel tip: I saw your comment on your user page, regarding architectural photography, I find the best way is to get as far away from the building as possible, then point the camera vaguely in the correct direction and snap Image:Tuscanchurch.gif. The advantage of this method is that one can cover the whole of a city like Florence or Sienna in half an hour before moving on to the next stop, this way one can enjoy the architectural experience later in the comfort of one'e own home wothout being trampled to death by a batallion of Japanese grandparents or having an American student's ice-cream dropped down one's neck. Giano 10:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

(laughter) The Santa Croce picture isn't showing on my browser: if it doesn't start working, I'll have to drop the gag. --Wetman 18:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Prometheus and (gulp) Pandora

Hey, Wetman. I'm glad you liked my rewrite of the Prometheus article. I'm sorry that I'm also the jackass who pissed you off during my messy renovation of the Pandora article. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the latter now that I'm more or less done with that one.

Regarding the pictures in the Prometheus article: I agree that it would be more pleasing aesthetically to spread them more evenly. I didn't know how at the time (that's the main reason), and since my training and primary interest is on the literature/history side, I felt I had bigger fish to fry (that's my weasley excuse).Ifnkovhg 21:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I begin afresh on each encounter; it's the best way. My most basic trick with recasting an article is to make sure that notes and references and quotations are scrupulously retained. I find that even referenced statements get deleted by the Lesser Lights, if they're not liked. And sometimes, if they're not understood. Cockscombry. As for illustrations: I like to see full captions that tell what the thing is and what you're seeing in it, and a layout that's balanced like a good art book, not with a foto-strip down one side like a water-park folder or a deli menu. The main thing to get away from in mythological articles, is the spurious synthesised "biography" that Bulfinch would assemble, selecting here and there to make one orthodox rendition, modelled after the Christian way with legendary saints. So that's what I like. I'll have a good hard look at Pandora and Prometheus, both of them subjects with a good deal of submerged history. --Wetman 23:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I see a good deal of lost referencing and information: Compare the versions.

Of Demeter's epithet Demeter Anesidora: "...an epithet assumed by the grain-goddess Demeter, who was venerated as Demeter Anesidora at Phlios in Attica.(note)Pausanias, I.31.2.(endnote) A marble altar inscribed to Demeter Anesidora, found in the sanctuary of Pergamon(note)North of the northeast corner of the great altar on the Demeter terrace(endnote) is conserved in Berlin.(note)Inv. 1910.32.19, illustrated in E. Ohlemutz, Die Kulte und Heiligtümer der Götter im Pergamon, (1940), 218.(endnote)."

You've replaced this with the unsourced general assertion "More commonly, however, the epithet anesidora is applied to Gaea or Demeter." Whether a common epithet or not, this is uninformative: the reader has no way to assess or use the statement. Gaia Anesidora could use a footnote reporting its appearance.

I don't want to get on your case in the article's talkpage, because your recasting is excellent. But do go through the comparison I linked just above (it's a "diff" in Wikipese) and get the remaining sourcing back into the article's notes. Unless you consider them irrelevant.--Wetman 00:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Wetman, thanks for your diligence. It is clear that I carted out some wheat with the chaff. I'll try to fix it ASAP. I'm new (No! You don't say!) to editing, and my exuberance overtook my attention to detail.Ifnkovhg 05:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Romanticism

It's unbelievable how often this article gets vandalised... Generic words like "Car" and "Sex" I can understand, but THIS? :-) Great work reverting the junk Lethe 14:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Mm-hmm. I'm just Kindergarten Kop. It's seventh-grader townies, I think, who are being introduced to Romanticism in Septembers? Or suburban high-school sophmores? So hard to tell the difference.--Wetman 14:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Bee (Mythology)

Hello! I've taken a liberal copy-editing to the article Bee (mythology) and I see that you have supplied the content for the page. As I have no experience in the matter of Bees in mythology, I hope that you will take a glance over to ensure that the accuracy of the article is still intact. I say "copy editing" loosly, as you write very well to begin with - mostly I reorganized. Take care! -Campanile 02:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

DYK

[deleted meesssagebox giving me credit for St Cuthbert's beads]

Cheers, Daniel 05:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

This is nice, but I can't take any credit for the article itself, Daniel. I had to delete the notice, or else later I'll gather it together for archiving with other DYK I can take some credit for. --Wetman 06:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Arion (mythology) at DYK

I've proposed a compromise of mentioning both Arion & Areion in the hook, as it seems a shame not to use this hook merely because of different transliterations. I'd be grateful if you could comment on the Suggestions page as to whether this is acceptable, as my knowledge of Greek mythology is close to zero. Regards, Espresso Addict 21:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. I left a note to say that my own Greek is limited to vocabulary. Kerenyi mentions "the horse Areion, a present from Herakles" in The Heroes of the Greeks, p 297 and "the divine steed Arion" p 157. --Wetman 21:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your swift response, worthy of the horse itself! I've added the article, though it might be a bit of a squash on tomorrow's mainpage. Cheers, Espresso Addict 21:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I always interpreted Wetman's comment on the proposal page as a question about what name the article should be listed under, never a criticsm of the DYK hook. I don't object to its listing that way, but it seems out of place, perhaps unprecedented, and a bit clunky by its redundancy for a DYK hook to list alternate spellings/nicknames/etc. (Imagine a DYK for the president reading, "...John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK), also called Jack Kennedy...") In any event there was never any dispute between us. Both spellings are popular and accepted. Robert K S 03:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I was keen to differentiate it from the poet of the same name, who is perhaps better known. Espresso Addict 04:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

In that case, I would have used the Areion spelling for the hook. But it's no biggie. Robert K S 04:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

That might indeed have been a better solution. I misread the discussion over the name to indicate that you'd be opposed to that. Sorry! Espresso Addict 05:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Not opposed, but incidentally, going by number of Google hits, Arion horse is slightly better-known than Arion poet. Robert K S 05:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Ebionites

The article above is currently in featured article review, based on the "quality" of recent additions to it. Your input in how to improve this article, and perhaps keep it at FA level, would be very much appreciated. Thank you for your attention. John Carter 19:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Edict of Châteaubriant

This was very timely to link to from Jean Duvet, also new this week! Perhaps you could see if you can add anything there, thanks Johnbod 19:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, in fact I arrived at the Edict pursuing a pesky redlink from Jean Duvet. I've been noticing his recent representation at WikiCommons! --Wetman 20:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

...leading to Royal Entry

Which was that? Or a dubious link perhaps - I've been a bit obsessed with boys' dresses this week. I've just seen where Triumphal entry actually goes - oh dear! Johnbod 20:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Oop! it was from Henry II of France that I pursued the link, as I circle roundabout like a dog on a hare. But now look at Jean Duvet illuminating the Edict of Châteaubriant! Colin Eisler dated it ca. 1548, following the sacre of Henri II in July 1547 (the dove of the Holy Spirit seen at top of the engraving brought the ampoule of chrism on a wire!), but I'd date it 1551, reflecting the initial successes of the war with Hapsburgs — the overthrown figure at the bottom is crowned and carries a baton — and the Edict of 1551 itself. But that would be original research, eh. Surely the designer of this print never spent decades in Geneva!

Oh, goodness! "Triumphal entry" indeed! Have you seen "Joyous Entry"? If we could get the best title for an article, there's a whole literature on Entries, which repeatedly occupied the best European architects and designers, from the court of Burgundy into the C18. --Wetman 21:01, 23 September 2007 (UTC)--Wetman 20:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Right, that's better. Redirect redirected for now. It's also introduced me to the ominous Category:Redirects with possibilities! There are huge websites (I think BM and Herzog Anton Ulrich library jointly) of online "Festival books" - the "Souvenir Programmes" for entries, weddings & coronations etc, some MS, some printed, & mostly illustrated BM and HAB - neither the easiest to use in my limited experience, but full of goodies. I don't have an illustration of that Duvet to hand sadly. He got a licence to print the Apocalypse series also. I think the Geneva one must have been a nephew or even son (his brother was a goldsmith too).Johnbod 21:29, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. that's better! Yes, you do have an illustration of that Duvet: it's the one at Edict of Châteaubriant I'm referring to. --Wetman 21:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah - turned up since I had read it, I think. Johnbod 21:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Now see where the classical equivalent, parousia, goes! Johnbod 01:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, that meaning has been pretty well co-opted for one Particular Advent or Another. In classical contexts do we resort to "numinous presence"? What do we call the "arrivals" of Dionysus in English? --Wetman 01:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

What do you (or anyone else) think is the best title - I like the idea of centring it on "entries" rather than general festivities: Triumphal entry, Royal entry, Ceremonial entry, Joyous Entry, Magnificent Entertainment (James I - sadly no I think), or something else? With capital E? I'll copy this to Talk:Joyous Entry. Johnbod 17:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Royal Entry is now up. Additions, especially pics, very welcome. Johnbod 17:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

That's a brilliant start. I added some footnotes and my usual tweaks for rhythm and emphasis. I linked baldachin and noted the transformation into Louis fêtes. Your use of the Duvet print is very apt. But I think in titling it Royal Entry instead of Triumphal Entry, you've eliminated the well-documented extremely grand entry of Leo X into Florence and the wedding procession of Ferdinando de' Medici and Christina of Lorraine, 1589. A 'triumph of Charles V' was still being painted on Sicilian wedding carts in the C19: my grandfather had one in his 'museum'.--Wetman 19:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The permanent version: the arch stands before the gate

I decided, after my query above, on the wider title - Trionfo is more specifically Italian, and was used for a variety of occasions. I'm still adding the example ones; I need French and Burgundian ones too. Both Triumphal entry and Entry now redirect. Johnbod 22:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

More undeveloped articles - I had a good laugh after I saw where your reference to Louis XIV's fêtes led - perhaps not the Roi Soleil's cup of tea, though I can imagine Monseigneur enjoying Bat a rat! Johnbod 00:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, It coming along very nicely, and many thanks for your additions - I'm rather dependent on Strong, on the nail though he certainly is. Johnbod 18:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I've added a Further Reference to a title by Bonner Mitchell, from the strength of its peer reviews. And the article should be among "Did You Know" on the Main Page, so I've suggested it. --Wetman 18:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I saw, thanks, I'll add a pic. What is the name of the early Renaissance free-standing triumphal arch in Naples - not the Castel Nuovo one? Or should I ask Giano? Johnbod 19:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

You'll want to ask Giano: I can only offer Arco trionfale del Castel Nuovo: the it:wiki article is quite thorough. Very conscious parallels with Roman triumphal processions immortalised in bas-reliefs. I'm reading an excellent article on Ferdinand's numerous triumphs in Spanish cities. --Wetman 20:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have the pic of the relief in a note. But there is a free-standing one near the station. I'll ask Giano. Johnbod 20:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

You have me pedalling hard to keep up, Johnbod, but I must say, it's very much what I like about Wikipedia. How quickly the article has grown. --Wetman 04:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

All yours for tonight now! I think we're nearly there now - I might sneak in a Valois example another day, as we're a bit Habsburg-heavy. It's pretty good now, I think. I was wondering about: a) the timing of the transition from tableau to painting, which Strong doesn't cover I think. The 1635 Antwerp Pompous Entry was already painted, I think. b) You would think some of the paintings would have been done well enough to be resold/reassigned afterwards, but I can't remember any surviving paintings identified as being used in entries etc. I vaguely remember reading some were removed from palaces & churches for use somewhere. Johnbod 05:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Something to be on the watch for. Another transition to the democratisation of the Triumphal Entry was the Fête de la Liberté (1798), the Triumphal Entry into Paris of the Classical and Renaissance works of art seized under terms of the Treaty of Tolentino. And, come to think of it, the Triumphal Entry of the Allies into Paris, 1944. Should these be mentioned? --Wetman 05:56, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget if you want to bring it up to more modern time we have Marble Arch and the even more modern Admiralty Arch (not a vert good article) which is barely a 100 years old and still used for the sovereign and visiting heads of state to pass through on state occasions [5]. (Sorry about Naples, I will make a couple of phone calls later on today - pribably one of those Napoleonic things he threw up all over the place!) Giano 07:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The interest in the arch in the Castel Nuovo in Naples, Giano, is particularly that it's a rare tangible survivor of one of these grand but ephemeral events. I mean, not because it's a triumphal arch per se. Look at how far Royal Entry has come! Do you have any suggestions for it? --Wetman 07:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

• It is a nice page, I would probably bring it up to date, and take it one step further into processional route, i.e. Champs-Élysées, The Mall in London, then Mussolini's planned route straight through the centre of Rome etc. - but that is not what the page is really about, and it would be too easy to go off subject. Besides there is nothing more irritating than trying to write a page and having someone else inserting whole sections off subject - it's fine as it is - Good luck to you both with it. Giano 10:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

PS - I have a couple of b/w Victorian prints of Queen Victoria passing under temporary Triumphal Arches during visits in England, if you need them or want, them uploading you know where to find me. Giano 10:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, those would be nice. The Fête de la federation - 1790 I think - was another big parade with arches. I came across various "triumphal entries" by G Washington also - the wartime entry, and the closeness in Rome, Antwerp & Bruges between what Joyous Entry calls "not so joyous" ones with the festivities, needs a para. There was a big Louis XV one to ? La Rochelle to keep the C18 pot boiling. I don't think this article should say much more than it does beyond the French Revolution, but Triumphal arch could be greatly expanded with much of the later stuff. etc I think I was thinking of the Porta Capuana in Naples - 1480s in fact. Like the Temple Bar & Golden Gate of Kiev the original wall is now gone, leaving only an arch. Johnbod 16:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Chelles chalice

Disappeared in the revolution? So that means that the images of the chalice must be by Bishop Saussay after all! Many thanks. I'll upload one now. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"...the chalice of Chelles, preserved until the French Revolution..." (Catholic Encyclopedia s.v. "Chalice" was my source; the colored engraving originally from Charles de Linas Orfèvrerie Mérovingienne: Les œuvres de Saint Eloi et la verroterie cloisonnée (Paris, 1864) is the only visual record of it, but apparently it was not lost in the Revolution, but afterwards. Dictionnaire d'Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie might be the most immediate source of the image you're thinking of; it came out in fascicles from 1907 onwards. If the on-line poster shop carries it, I suspect that the illustration is from a sufficiently early fascicule to be in the public domaine. Linas certainly is. --Wetman 22:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Huvadhu Atoll clarification

If you check carefully you will see that the paragraph in question is precisely not a contribution of mine. Someone else has written that.Mohonu 04:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I see. This is the "diff", a record of your edit. Under the circumstances, you can hardly be surprised that I should think you were responsible for putting it into the article. Now I see that in fact you simply cut and pasted this text, which you were shifting from Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll, where, you'll be sorry to hear, the text was inserted by a hoaxer, User:Woofe705.

I'll paste our conversation at Talk:Huvadhu Atoll, to keep the record straight. --Wetman 04:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank You. I am glad it's clear now.Mohonu 05:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I see that you deleted my cautious inquiry at your Userpage with the edit summary "deleted slanderous accussation [sic]". No matter: I don't suppose our paths will cross again. --Wetman 06:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Vladimir Wiese

You are correct. This one is not a hoax. There's an island in the Arctic Ocean named after him, and an article in the Great Russian Encyclopaedia. Kudos for spotting "Sir Fergus", though. --Ghirla^-трёп- 21:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Caelus

Luna's schmata?

Hi! I added to a mythology article called Caelus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caelus Would you mind editing it or cleaning it up? Thanks! Neptunekh 23:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

There. I hope you approve of my edits, which were mostly for tightening up the wording. Now, here's the loose end: there's a name for the billowing arch of robes that flutter over the head of a divinity in Hellenistic and Roman art (including mosaics), often seen in Roman representations of Fortuna (Arms of Glückstadt) Selena/Luna (see at right) or Amphitrite (the [whatsis] is held by putti over the heads of Neptune and Amphitrite in the Cirta mosaic). I can't for the life of me recall what it's called. Can one of the habitual lurkers here name the convention? Would it merit a mini-article? --Wetman 00:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

A footnote for the user page?

diff Johnbod 03:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

"Regarded & considered by many"

Wetman, I was again reading thru your amusing User Page, and thought I would run the statistics for "regarded by many" and "considered by many" -- Google found 1,450 of the former and 5,210 of the latter. Of course, one of them is your User Page, but it's a drop in the bucket . . . Keep up the good work, Madman 13:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Gasp! Wait, Madman, the situation is less dire if you include the quotation marks, to pick up only the full phrases. Still bad enough, actually: "regarded by many" 919 pages, "considered by many" 3643. "If seven maids with seven mops Swept for half a year, Do you think, by any chance, that they could get it clear? "I doubt it," said the Carpenter and shed a bitter tear. --Wetman 20:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I did use quotation marks ("regarded by many" site:en.wikipedia.org) and I still get 1,440. When I run "generally regarded", I get 3060 and "generally considered" 8700. Hmm, add all those together and that's -- yikes -- 0.9% of all articles! Oh sorrowful day, callooh callay (he says, misquoting). Madman 21:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For your regularly high-quality contributions and particularly for the image of Deliyiannis' assassination, I award you this orginal barnstar. Argos'Dad 00:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:LeoTaxilmysteres.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:LeoTaxilmysteres.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff

Hi. I'd just like to express the fact that I'm impressed. Only 15 minutes after I finished the translation of the Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff article, you had already tweaked typos and such. Amazing. athinaios 19:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I already had the article on my watchlist from the lame previous version. Good work!--Wetman 19:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Piracy infobox on Francis Drake

I replied to your comment on Talk:Francis Drake and I really don't understand your thinking behind the piracy infobox not belonging. If you could reply on my talk page or the the article's talk page I'd be glad to address any questions you have. Thanks! Deflagro ^C/_T 23:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I redid the infobox and would like to get your opinion on it. Thanks! Deflagro ^C/_T 20:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Greek agate

Hi I added I section to the article Greek Agate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_agate Would you mind editing it please? Thanks! Neptunekh 19:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I've edited it. Check this diff to see what I did. It's shorter, because whatever one says in seven words is always better in five. Keep an eye on the layout conventions of other pages, such as capitals and bolding. Make links to articles with more information on a related aspect, like agate. If Greek agate is true agate, wouldn't it be better as a section at Agate? You need to add some sources for the information. Best regards! --Wetman 21:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Wartberg

Hi Wetman. It's the second time I have to thank you for tweaking an article I created. Your changes to Wartberg culture are much appreciated. Thanks. athinaios 07:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I only tweak the interesting ones! --Wetman 08:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you again. You are a gentleman. athinaios 08:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

"The curse is come upon me," cried the Lady of Auxerre

You've touched a sore spot :-) The Lady of Auxerre is protected by a glass case. I've tried many times to shoot a picture, and each time I've refrained from uploading it because of ugly glass reflections. I didn't know there were articles about the statue, though, so I'll try again next time I go the the Louvre. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, so that's the problem. I wrote the article because I felt she's too important not to be covered. The painted replica is Halloween, however. --Wetman 17:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Here you are. Not the best pictures ever shot, pray :-/ Jastrow (Λέγετε) 20:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The Lady of Auxerre thanks you. Now she needs some more text.... --Wetman 22:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Gatton Park

Impressive speed in adding new content! Many thanks for your input.Dick G 03:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Does the interior still contain the spectacular Italianate "Marble Hall"? Pevsner said the Chapel/parish church is a bijou: should the quote go in? --Wetman 04:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It appears it may now form part of the school estate [6]. Probably still worth including the quote, suitably caveated. BTW I thoroughly enjoyed reading your User page, good work. Dick G 04:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Grossular

I have a Reference have like to add in the Grossular article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossular The parts where it says [citation needed] about The chemical structure for viluite is Ca2(Mg,Fe)5Si8O22(OH)2, Calcium Magnesium Iron Silicate Hydroxide and Some Data Indicates it to be similar to nephrite jade in luster and color. I have article you could use an a Reference: http://www.geocities.com/smresource9/minerology/viluite.html Could you try make this a reference please for those pieces of information? Thank you. Neptunekh 10:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

This diff shows you how I did it for you; the <ref></ref> is in the list of Wiki markup terms below the editing window when you're in edit mode. The http address is enclosed within square brackets ([]) followed by a space and its title or description; without a title the whole http will be displayed, which is less informative and ugly. I'm astonished that I'm able to tell you this, because I'm no technie, I assure you! --Wetman 20:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the reference as it is not a reliable source. A geocities Sailor Moon resources page does not qualify as WP:RS. Vsmith 02:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Any reference Vsmith would like to substitute for the perfectly accuration information in the deprecated link will be most welcome. --Wetman 02:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Niedermünster, Regensburg

Thank you for your sympathetic edits to the article - a lot clearer. HeartofaDog (talk) 23:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Good, then I got the intended facts right. It's always nice to have one's efforts noticed: thank you for taking the trouble to post a note! --Wetman 00:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Lucy

Thanks for the insights, and for a great framework for expansion. You might enjoy this play on the series. The melody captures the mood quite well, imo. Ceoil 20:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd have worked up my suggestions into some edits, if I'd had more gumption. Thank you!--Wetman 23:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

A question about "Talk:Closet play"

Isn't a word "not" missing from a last sentence in that context? ApolloOG3 21:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

No. Being ironic. You see, I had already noticed, so long ago, that Wikipedians often and consistently pick the more obscure title, whenever there is a choice. My post there back in 2005 was intended to push the article, as Closet drama, as a natural subsection of Drama. I haven't checked to see whether that's been done. --Wetman 22:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer to my satisfaction. --ApolloOG3 00:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Kentucky

I have found a truly nice American house to write up User:Giano/Kentucky Governor's Mansion but no decent infomation anywhere. I am inaging the Petit Trianon there and Ledoux - do you have any info the existing page is painfully inadequate Kentucky Governor's Mansion. Giano 08:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Giano! Yes, I was lurking at your page, "couldn't help overhearing", and lo! everything I could come up with on the Webers is already edited in. The virtual tour offered at the official Kentucky Governor's Mansion website reminded me of the Alamo tour in Pee-wee's Big Adventure, so flawlessly improvised by Jan Hooks of "Saturday Night Live":

"This Mission, the Alamo, named from the Spanish word for cottonwood tree, was established in the year ...The same year that our city was founded by the Spanish expeditionary force... on the site of an Indian burial mound.... This is one of my favorite parts of the tour. [Diorama display] Say hello to our residents, Pedro, and his wife Inez. Pedro is working on an "adobe." Can you say that with me?" [Tour group dutifully responds, 'Adobe.'] "Inez is holding a clay pot, of which she seems to be very proud. She has decorated it with lots of paint and glaze. ...We are now in the kitchen of the Alamo women. Here they are preparing culinary delights of the Southwest. Do I hear someone's stomach growling? The mainstay of the Alamo diet is corn. Corn can be prepared in many ways. It can be boiled, shucked, creamed or in this case dried. Corn can also be used to make tortillas. Do we have any Mexican-Americans with us today? Well Buenas dias! Yes, there are thousands and thousands of uses for corn, all of which I'm going to tell you about right now! ...Upon this battlement, in 1836, two hundred Texas volunteers, including such heroes as Davy Crockett, Bill Travis and Jim Bowie, fought off an onslaught of Mexicans under the command of [elaborately Spanish] General Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana. ...At this time, I'd like to conclude our tour; you-all have been one of the greatest groups I have ever worked with."

• Yes I once had a similar experience in the Valley of the Kings - when the guide said, I expect some of the Pharos were not too happy when they died but to be buried here must have been a compensation which cheered them up. More to the point do we have any definitive info on what looks to be a fairly accomplished design inspired by Ledoux. Giano 21:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Among the agonies of public lecturing are the things one hears oneself saying... Edward A. Weber (1875-1929) seems to have been the dominant partner, but I've turned up nothing about his training. By this date (1912) there were battalions of well-trained architectural draftsmen in the U.S., so you'd need archival material to discern the actual designer in the office. I hadn't noted that the firm also built the Norwood Municipal Building (Norwood, Ohio) (a Wikipedia stub, I now see); the "J.S. Adkins" of the firm is I suppose John Scudder Adkins (born in St. Louis, 1872), the listed architect of the Lilly Building, Cincinnati, and of Lillybanks (Cincinnati, Ohio). I'm getting this from Hamilton County, Ohio, National Reg. of Historic Places and from googlepeeking into Cincinnati, the Queen City, 1788-1912 (S.J. Clarke Publishing Company), a "prominent figures" vanity publication with a list of Scudder projects. Could the designer of the Governor's Mansion have been Scudder, with many grand private residences to his credit by 1912, with the Webers put to the fore to make the firm a competitor, as a "Kentucky" firm? .--Wetman 22:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Phantom Crystals

I created a page called Phantom crystal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_crystal Would you mind editing it? Thank you! Neptunekh 03:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that Phantom crystal is simply a form of Quartz and that the paragraph belongs in the larger article. Think "encyclopedic treatment" whenever you're in doubt about whether a short new article is required. --Wetman 03:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

THANKS

Thanks for the help on Galapagos Land Iguana. I appreciate it!--Mike Searson 20:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Small stuff, but thanks for noticing. I couldn't resolve the ambiguity I expressed at Talk:Galapagos Land Iguana, but I see you've nailed it.--Wetman 21:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Gallia Transpadana

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Gallia Transpadana, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Gallia Transpadana is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Gallia Transpadana, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 13:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey. Yes, I redirected it there now. I would have done it earlier, if I had known something about the subject. Deleted "bad" redirects are no big deal, as you can always re-create a redirect if you have a suitable, existing target for it. In case you are wondering, the page redirected to Transpadana when I deleted it. Thanks, Prolog 03:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent! Thank you. I hesitate to force open a deletion. --Wetman 03:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I put Benford's law of controversy up for afd

regards,Rich 03:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Treaty of Crépy

As I've just absorbed the small article you'd written on the Treaty of Crépy into Italian War of 1542–1546, I thought I might ask you to glance at the result and let me know if you see any problems with what I've done. Thanks! Kirill 12:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem with the 40% of the information that you entered. --Wetman 14:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I had been hesitant to lean too much on Armstrong, given the age of the work and the inconsistencies between his description and that of more modern historians; but if you consider him to be reliable, I'll follow your lead in the matter. Kirill 15:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for improving English

I am a freshman in Wikipedia and in English... I thank you a lot for your yesterday corrections in Pamplona. I would like to put a kind of advise for asking other wikipedians to correct my English in the articles I write, do you know how? I have written other contributions that maybe need a linguistic clean up. Thank you again.Tradewater 09:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I'm glad you didn't take my efforts amiss! Why not add "please vet my English" to your edit summaries, when you're feeling insecure about your English, which is as good as that of many American writers of English? I often add "please vet my edit" when I'm editing in areas where I'm feeling most amateurish, like palaeontology. --Wetman 13:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Bodegisel II

I am here based on your substantial edits to Arnulf of Metz‎. I have just put up Bodegisel II, (a poorly attested person connected with Arnulf), for deletion and would welcome anything you might add to the discussion. Thanks. Mdbrownmsw 15:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I discovered no mention of Arnulf's mother in the little research on him I did. Many minor figures can be handled with a redirect to the encyclopedia-worthy main figure and dealt with in a footnote. --Wetman 16:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Pitsa panels

Thanks for your praise! I hope to add some references soonish... athinaios 16:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm just now going up your list of recent articles for my instruction and pleasure. --Wetman 16:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Apaliunas

Hi Wetman, long time, etc. I noticed your comment on Talk: Apaliunas about "checking for copyvios"; that's an odd comment. What's the backstory on that? -- llywrch 17:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Crotchety, eh? The mirror sites reflect new text with alacrity. See Talk:Église de la Madeleine, Talk:Arch of Titus and User talk:Wetman/archive10Aug2007 (under "Arch of Titus 'plagiarism'"). In a more charming example, at Talk:Golden Gate Park, someone just couldn't believe that such accomplished text could be produced by a mere mortal! I can't remember the other occasions. It comes I suppose from finishing text too much before saving it. If I sound like a bear, well, I am a bear! We never seem to cross paths any more, llywrch. --Wetman 18:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

It goes without saying that you're crotchety. ;-) No, I just hadn't heard that anyone accused you of indulging in copyright violations. (I had my own encounter a couple of years back -- see Talk:Geraint of Dumnonia.) As for "crossing paths", I've mostly been busy educating myself about Ethiopia, & sharing my findings on Wikipedia. Lately, I've been learning the hard way that E. A. Wallis Budge is an unreliable source -- guilty of sloppy researching which makes Wikipedia look good! (For an example, see the recent revisions to Demetros of Ethiopia, especially the version based on Wallis Budge, & the latest version based on his source.) -- llywrch 21:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd better have a look!--Wetman 09:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Bramall Hall

Thanks for adding in the plan. I was about to myself, but I had to go AFK. Majorly (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I scout the new files, because lots of good images get lost in the shuffle if they're not immediately used, and it's hard to search for them.--!!!!

Cost of the Palace of Versailles

I saw your comment in the discussion of the cost of the palace, and what you referenced, namely the Bâtimens du Roi. I am looking for other information about it or anything else that talks about the cost that i can cite. I have looked outside of wikipedia for some time, and cannot find anything on these things. Where did you get yours? is there something you can reference to me that is citable (meaning not wikipedia)? Thanks a lot for your help. Maverick Mac November 7, 2007.

The books to get (though I don't have them) and use for a wholesome recasting of Château of Versailles are Alfred Marie, Versailles au temps de Louis XIV, Paris, 1976, and Alfred and Jeanne Marie, Versailles au temps de Louis XV, 1715–1745 (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1984). There will be estimates of the total cost there, I should think. The pitfalls lie in "translating" to a modern value of money. A workman today expects to eat meat twice a day, and takes indoor plumbing, central heating, and electricity for granted. The comparisons should be made to other contemporary figures: official customs receipts for one of the ports, say. --Wetman 09:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Bastards

Some one has slapped an "own research" tag on me here [7] it probably is my own research, as I can't find a source to cite saying just that. However, do you think the statement is so blindingly obvious that the tag could be removed. If not the paragraph will have to go, which is a pity as it makes a nice conclusion to a nice little page. Opinion appreciated. Giano 17:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Eh? That's not OR, but whatever. Well anyway I think Wetman missed adding a cite for support of "idiosyncratic" [8] :) Clearly that paragraph doesn't have enough cites yet. Except that maybe it already has too many according to some others. (and don't ask me why I turned up here) ++Lar: t/c 19:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I do address the occasional lurker here as Gentle Reader, from time to time, and should be disappointed to think there were none, Friend Lar. As for me, I would never add an tag to a statement in a field where I had never read anything at all, for fear that it might actually air a generic commonplace quite thoroughly familiar to my betters, and that I might be taken for a coxcomb. The Products of American public education seems largely to have majored in Self-Confidence; over-brimming with it, they do tend to rush in where one might have feared to tread. But in Wikipedia as it has become, an article can hardly be over-footnoted, ordinarily, in most journals, a sign of the insecure and recently-educated. --Wetman 20:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I cannot remember the last time I laughed aloud reading a post - actually I can and it involved a wedding. Please Wetman - do not feel the need to pop over and answer any of my Arbcom questions! Giano 20:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

... what, Giano? not slashing left and right on your behalf, bursting little balloons as one pops packaging bubbles... raising squeaks of dismay and resentment? No, perhaps not, but I think your answers there are just such a model of Temperance and unruffled Deportment as I should aspire to. --Wetman 00:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

DYKNom Waldalenus

Hi. I've nominated Waldalenus, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created on November 12, where you can improve it if you see fit. — Komusou ^talk @ 07:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Very cool indeed, Komusou. I couldn't come up with a hook. --Wetman (talk) 13:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Minangkabau

Thanks for the tags on the article. Hopefully you'll be available to peer review it before I'm ready to send it to GA review. (Caniago (talk) 04:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC))

My advice is, skip the "good article" hurdle, where you'll be thoroughly pestered over nothing, by editors with no genuine interest in the subject, and take it right to Featured Article. Let me know beforehand, and I'll come and untangle the syntax. As a general rule, it's best not to refer to unspecified sources ("it is said..." etc etc); it sounds wise, but it's merely owlish. --Wetman (talk) 04:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me!

I have responded to threads you started on these pages: Talk:French Revolution and Talk:King Arthur. In future I would appreciate it if you would do me the courtesy of contacting me when you wish to moan about actions I have performed on Wikipedia, rather than leaving unfounded accusations on article talkpages. Regards, User:WJBscribe 04:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

(Wetman does not fruitlessly engage in Talkpage chitchat on subjects better treated coolly and publicly at the articles involved. Thoughtlessly unprotecting pages en masse is a discourtesy to hard-working editors; not checking back to see what vandalism ensues is irresponsible. And "Moan" is a bit pert.)

Helpful?

Hi Wetman, I would have like to have e-mailed you but no e-mail address. Regardless of one's opinion on the Palazzo Pitti FARC'ing, is tracking down another editor's work really helpful? [9], [10], [11], [12].

I don't think it is helpful, in fact, it might just inflame an already childish situation b/w long standing and valued editors. Please explain (civilly of course) if I'm wrong. Happy to discuss. kind regards. --Merbabu (talk) 05:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm most anxious to assist Miss Caniago in raising her editing to meet the high standards that she has set in applying Palazzo Pitti so generously with tags, an act that someone less generous than I might interpret as a form of furtive vandalism. How could that assessment be apt? Or even whispered? I would never suggest such a thing: I merely note that she has never edited constructively on that article or on any Renaissance or architectural subject whatsoever. Her own editing, by contrast, is singularly free of references or footnotes. Temperate Readers of this post will notice from your links above that I have put the mildest suggestions into some respective talkpages rather than flag the text— save in one egregious example— and furthermore, where Miss Caniago has made an attempt to source her statements, I have not interfered.

There is a broader issue, though one that I don't expect we can address here, Merbabu, and that is, how to protect Wikipedia from being intentionally damaged, under cover of applying rigorous standards, by the misuse of tags and banners? None of the better Wikipedians are able to use these devices because they've been rendered so trashy. But that will not be our concern here. --Wetman (talk) 06:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

You may have a point but that is beside my point. My suggestion for the most effective way to win him over would be to bring your thoughts to his talk page, drop the sarcastic put downs (I know you know this is obvious). I don't normally see sarcastic attempts at ridicule winning people over. I note that you are not alone in this, nor has Caniago been overly civil in this issue either. But, I'm just looking for ways to calm down a ridiculous situation to which you are party. Kind regards. --Merbabu (talk) 06:18, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

PS, on a note completely unrelated to the issue above (seriously!), I like your "Wikipedia is a game" quote. Nice one! --Merbabu (talk) 06:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Win Miss Caniago over? Over to what? No matter. I have surely misstepped if my irony has been mistaken for sarcasm. Now, what constitutes a good move at the "game" of Wikipedia— as opposed to a false move— is not completely unrelated, as you'll very likely agree! --Wetman (talk) 07:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Time to stop the nonsense mate. I have never tried to nominate one of "my" articles for ascension to GA or FA standards, I'm fully aware they are not yet ready. If you want to play in the FA league you have to be able to accept reasonable criticism. Maybe you could enlighten why the opinions embedded in the prose of this article don't need inline citations instead of avoiding the issue entirely with your childish games. (Caniago (talk) 09:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC))

Dear Ms Caniago, So far I have removed the phrases you feel need cites, and that apparently is not right. I have de-featured the page myself and that is not right either. So instead of harassing us all here, why not pop out get the books and cite them yourself. Wetman and I clearly feel they are accepted and noncontroversial facts that don't need citing. I do this to unreffed pages all the time if I have concerns [13] - why can't you? Regards. Giano (talk) 12:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

There is no onus on me as a reviewer to do anything. I have many times added citations to articles, there is nothing special what you say you have done. Its pretty lame to attack someone who has reviewed an article because they won't go and fix all the problems with it. The FA status is obviusly pretty important to you for this article but you are too lazy to maintain it and instead take the easy way out of attacking anyone who has the temerity of suggesting it no longer meets the FA standards. Its a shame. (Caniago (talk) 14:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC))

Category:European court festivities

All new recruits to this scattered band of articles welcome. Johnbod (talk) 23:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Categories rarely inspire, but this one has focus. You are a pro! Everything I can think of so far is already enlisted. Is there some overlap with Category:State ritual and ceremonial? --Wetman (talk) 00:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! The theory (!) is that these are more fun - I want to keep well away from the heralds & genealogists, but I should add a note on each. Johnbod (talk) 00:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Anthemoessa

Hi! I created a page called Anthemoessa. It's about the island of the Sirens. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthemoessa Would you mind editing it please? Thanks! Neptunekh (talk) 06:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Neptunekh, since the island has no existence in Greek myth apart from the sirens that dwell there, then Anthemoessa should be a redirect to Siren (mythology), where you should cut 'n paste the text you have written, under the heading

== Anthemoessa ==

You haven't proofread your text carefully yet, and I don't want to come in and overwrite it. Check your text for spelling and give some references using the <ref></ref>. The best references are to classical authors that mention this island by name; look for them at | http://www.theoi.com by searching " Anthemoessa " in the search box, upper left corner at that site. If you get hung up in these details, check back with me, okay? I want to help, but I don't want to do it for you. --Wetman (talk) 07:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. I got a similar ping from Neptunekh to assist with the article. Didn't notice this discussion til I had rewritten it and checked "What links here" but agree it should probably be a merge - potentially to Sirenum scopuli rather than a section-merge to Sirens. My (hopefully constructive) criticism is at talk. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjgibb (talk • contribs) 10:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC) Apologies for not signing, it's getting late here...Dick G (talk) 10:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Sirenum_scopuli

Hi! Would you mind merging Anthemoessa with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirenum_scopuli like Rjgibb suggested? Thanks! Neptunekh (talk) 11:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Les Mignons

Had you seen my Favourite, or is showing up here just a coincidence? Any help welcome - I don't have the books or the energy for straight history articles. Johnbod (talk) 05:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, no I hadn't, Johnbod: I've had a first pleasurable look-over now. But I tripled the length of Les Mignons back in September, and it's embedded in my Watchlist: plus, it's a sitting duck for vandals, should they ever discover it. My first impression is, as soon as "mistresses" is added to the mix, the political and administrative element— does one ever really know what transpires in other beds?— becomes dilute. The article Royal mistress ought to get a "disambiguating" mention and link instead. --Wetman (talk) 06:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I like "heterodox sexuality" that'll throw the 6th grade (and others)! Johnbod (talk) 17:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

John Parkinson (botanist)

Hi, thanks for locating the on-line version of the Daily Telegraph newspaper article for "John Parkinson (botanist)". I tried doing a search for it earlier today but for some reason couldn't find it. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious to discover whether Anne Parkinson, who's a BBC journalist rather than a historian, has found any documents linking Parkinson, who was Royal Apothecary, specifically to Henrietta Maria. No one in the C17 would have thought of introducing the Queen to any person; people were introduced to her. Henrietta Maria had the manor house at Wimbledon, southeast of London, where she had an orangery (it was inventoried for the value of its materials by Parliamentary commissioners in 1640). I've never seen any specific connection of Parkinson to any particular project that involved the Queen, other than his book dedication, which under the circumstances would have been all but required. --Wetman (talk) 16:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

south west in fact - Wimbledon, London SW19 Johnbod (talk) 02:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

And read orangery if you get a chance! Carcharoth (talk) 13:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops. Wetman started that article. I feel foolish now... Carcharoth (talk) 13:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

(en)Gravelot

So, do you mind sentence tweaking? Your 2nd 'graph has a real corker that needs clarification. There is some context and stuff that I can toss about, if you want it. (I've found it interesting that he's both a premium engraver and yet associated with the dissenting authors.) Geogre (talk) 14:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Certainly not, I'm always tuning up the text of others: what's sauce for the goose... Context is essential: Gravelot is as much at the heart of English Rococo as Hogarth. Are you interested in the St. Martin's Lane Academy, precursor to the R.A., or in the Slaughter's Coffee House set? --Wetman (talk) 16:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Not the former, much. The latter, yes, but not until we get some of the massive houses researched. Button's and Will's and White's and the Grecian are massively important, but... it's just damn near impossible to find any research already done on them and consequently difficult to do any research. A person who lived in London might have a chance with primary records, but, of course, that would be OR. Still the world waits for the book it needs on 18th c. coffee houses and chocolate houses. Geogre (talk) 17:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Beresford Chancellor comes to mind, and the Survey of London. --Wetman (talk) 19:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Setting a bad example

your recent edit Interesting that you chose to restore erroneous information and that you consider Wikipedia a "game". Good luck and I hope you have a great day.Oroblanco (talk) 02:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

door slams... pause...offstage crash of pots and pans

...and that, Gentle Reader, was someone who saw the first line of my Userpage before terminal Attention Deficit Disorder kicked in. And that particular use of "interesting"? Discommended. --Wetman 00:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Gentle reader? So now I have "Attention Deficit Disorder?" You have no reason or right to so publicly insult me, Wetman, and I do take offense at your insinuation. You state on your own page that you consider Wikipedia to be a game, and did restore erroneous information to a page, removing correct data. I found that to be "interesting" and said so. I also wished you a nice day and good luck, in words which surely do not deserve your nasty remarks in reply. Discommended? I find your use of THAT term to be quite inappropriate. What is your "screenplay" subtitling, describing door slams, crash of pots and pans, some attempt at humor or posted to enhance the impression of Gentle Reader, concerning your rant that follows? You do not know me in the slightest, to be publishing such insulting remarks. I await your public apology.

Perhaps you need to be reminded of Wikipedia's policy, of Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oroblanco (talk • contribs) 09:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

very truly, Oroblanco —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oroblanco (talk • contribs) 09:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't imagine what in particular set off these ravings. ...but don't enlighten me, Gentle Reader.--Wetman (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Wetman's resources of patience and forbearance are in perennially short supply. Principles of triage require that no more of these reserves be expended than any one situation requires. Your understanding is appreciated.

Re: Telegony (heredity)

(We like it better than Telegony (pregnancy).)

Wetman, much better! But you're not off the hook...I'm afraid you'll be stuck working on the rest too, by yourself, at least for now. ;) I'm in a stressful deadline jam IRL at the moment and won't be able to dedicate any time here at all for while. Later and best wishes, Pia (talk) 06:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ojós!

Piecing together information from this site, realising that Eyya was an Anglicisation of an Arabicisation of a Latin placename which has since become a Spanish placename, I believe that "Eyya" is Ojós, which does not have an en.wiki article as of now. Srnec 23:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant! No wonder my little boat was swamped!--Wetman 00:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Maison particulier

Hi, I saw you looked in at Alexandre Bontemps. Would his "maison particulier" on the Ile Saint-Louis count as a Hôtel particulier? I thought more recently the term meant a genteel brothel, but maybe I'm getting confused. Actually having done a quick Google, either the French brothel resale market is very active, or I am. I suppose they all are what we English call detatched. Johnbod 00:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Depends on its layout. Earlier usage aside, by the C17 a maison is flush with the street: open the big door and you're inside. An hôtel stands entre cour et jardin: the big door in the street has double leaves and admits a coach into the courtyard, at the back of which the habitation looks from the back into some kind of private garden space. A railing may divide the court, the cour d'honneur, from the street, or dependancies, like porter's lodgings or the backs of the stables may continue the street facade right across the front. Space is cramped on the Île St-Louis: a maison with a bit of jardin maybe? --Wetman 00:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I expect so - if only this site was a bit less fuzzy. One could probably track the place down. Johnbod 00:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Megullia Dotata

Your input would be appreciated on the article Megullia Dotata.--Doug ^talk 22:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Manuscripts online

Wetman, I was given your name by Dmsdgold, who said that you and Adam Bishop had been active in articles about manuscripts in the past. I recently found this page and thought you might be interested -- I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to know which, if any, of these manuscript images are worth uploading, but I thought you might. I'd be happy to upload some of the images if you can point me at the right ones. I've also left this note for Adam Bishop. Thanks; I hope this is useful. Mike Christie (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Mike. I think the website you link should be linked in a footnote at Cartulary; I'll see to that. Do cue me in if you come across any further apparently un-noticed websites giving access to medieval manuscripts: I think linking from appropriate Wikipedia pages is usually the most important step. --Wetman (talk) 21:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Galfridus de Fontibus

Your editing of Galfridus de Fontibus in incorrect. Galfridus de Fontibus is Geoffrey of Wells, Norfolk.

Ha! excellent! Fontis: Wells. I just knew the Galfridus in question wasn't the theologian of Paris. I trust my anonymous correspondent to have made the correction. --Wetman (talk) 20:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Harmatchis

Hi! I created a page about a Egyptian god called Harmatchis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmatchis%22 Would you mind editing it please? Thanks! Neptunekh (talk) 10:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Others had made it a redirect to Horus, which was right, and I've added a footnote with your Greek and Latin renderings, not to lose them. The best procedure, Neptunekh, is always to add to an existing article, to make it more encyclopedic, more complete and fully-rounded, rather than to begin a new one under a separate heading. --Wetman (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Approval

You don't need my approval [14] for anything! It looks great! —ScouterSig 23:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! that was lightning-fast! I wanted to brush its hair before it appeared on the Main page. At Talk:An Apology for Poetry I suggested the use of topic sentences, the better to marshal thoughts within each paragraph. --Wetman 23:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It's appearing on the main page? —ScouterSig 23:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, DYK: "Did you know?" section, it was nominated by User:Gatoclass; that's where I noticed it. --Wetman

Hello

I've just seen your user page, you will be banned if you publicise things like that! Anyhow what I am here for is to see if you would like to tweak/add something here. Goddamn awaful name but there seems to have been a vote on its talk page before I discovered it, so I suppose one can't really do much about it. Never the less, research has proved very interesting, and I found lots of fascinating things, I especially liked the architeture reflecting the pointless lives they led at the time, all referenced too. Hope all is well, it was nice to see I can still do a page, very re-assuring. Giano (talk) 14:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I tweaked it, Giano, for your approval: revert what you don't think is an improvement. I'm strongly backing your Arbitration Committee candidacy, but I hope it's not interrupting the more essential and pleasurable contributions you make to the encyclopedia. --Wetman 22:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I always fence with a double edged sword. Giano (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

That's not fencing, Giano, that's swashbuckling!--Wetman 00:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmph, I was seeing myself more as D'Artagnan. Giano (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Francis Drake

Hey I thought I would just let you know that I responded to Drake's Cadiz Adventure on Talk:Francis Drake. Thanks! Deflagro ^C/_T 23:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The Drake article conflates the unsuccessful raid at La Coruña with the very successful one at Cadiz... (continued, with a suggested reference, at Talk:Francis Drake). --Wetman 23:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Temple University Endowment

Hey Wetman, I just wanted to let you know that the updated endowment numbers for Temple University are definitely located in that PDF. Do a search in it for "Temple" or check down at school number #229. Thanks for keeping an eye on the article. :) fintler (talk) 19:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Then it's okay? Thanks. I always feel that anonymous IP changes to statistics should be vetted before they get embedded in the article's history; nothing spoecal about this occasion. --Wetman (talk) 20:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Alva Belmont

Hey, thanks for your edits to Alva Belmont. I did some work on it earlier today and all of those references to her as Belmont during her adolescent years and marriage to Vanderbilt really bugged me. I had left them as they were because it seems that someone else was intent on that usage and had even moved the article to reflect it. Altairisfar^talk 08:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, "Belmont" seemed like an odd Bolshevik way to refer to Mrs Belmont. The younger Mrs Belmont also deserves fuller treatment at Wikipedia, where any subject that remotely suggests the presence of an upper class meets stiff resentment, I've found: challenges to every commonplace statement... --Wetman (talk) 08:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography

So here is one part of our case, close to a thousand references of Virtualology content cited with no "spam" claims whatsoever were removed Wikipedia. How can you they just unilaterally do this to content that has been referenced by Wikipedia as Virtualology's and Appleton's Encyclopedia for so many years?... and much more in the same vein by Anonymous User:97.97.197.9.

Yes, that will do. Wetman has no need to be informed of this badly-managed administrative bungle. He has revised Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography, and linked to the babble at Administrator's Noteboard, at Talk:Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography but has not retained it on his Watchlist and will not be commenting further on this foolish distraction, where he can be of no help. Wetman (talk) 08:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Last words from the bowl

It wasn't blanking my friend. It was redirecting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikpdanerdsarebad (talk • contribs) 07:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

"New" User:Wikpdanerdsarebad, thoroughly familiar with disruptive techniques and without doubt a sockpuppet of some obstructer, blanked the content of Wikipedia:Sock puppetry and replaced it with a redirect. --Wetman (talk) 07:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

...and... flushed into the drains. Credit to alert Administrators.--Wetman (talk) 07:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini

Hello Wetman,

I think the wiki diff just through you off, the text you mentioned is not actually deleted, but the diff shows it as removed and then also shows its as inserted. Let me know if you still have concerns. My intent was only to add information. WilliamKF (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, there it is, sitting right in the current version. Sorry to interrupt you about this. I think I'd better work out more details of just what Poggio Bracciolini did turn up. Thanks. --Wetman (talk) 00:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Brassempouy

Hi there. Thanks for the edits. The article is not just more accessible now, it's simply better! Just one thing, it really is the Mal'ta Venus. Nothing to do with the island Malta. athinaios (talk) 20:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a really interesting article you linked to. Where, or rather how, did you find it? athinaios (talk) 21:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Googling. It's not that I'm so smart: I'm just a brilliant googler! Looking for É. Piette's first name, I searched "Piette Brassempouy", I think. Not such a huge flood of hits to search through, you'll imagine. I think the article Burin still needs to explain just what identifies a "Noailles" burin: I'll get after that. --Wetman (talk) 00:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Dates

Thank you for your recent message. I've been doing a lot of work trying to clean up the effects of date warriors recently, and I'm well aware that having a history full of changes to era styles can raise eyebrows and cause questions to be asked. Consequently, I try to make my motivations and reasoning as explicit as possible to anyone who inquires.

Actually, my understanding of the Wikipedia rules on this sort of thing is, I think, a little different from yours. The way I understand it, it works like this:

1. Articles should be internally consistent with regard to era style.
2. Unless you have a substantial reason for change, leave the era style in the article the way you found it. This is a little different from saying that the original era style used in the article must be maintained.

The reason I made the particular edit that you mentioned is because Cybele had recently been hit by a date warrior and reverted by an admin who (I think) hit the rollback button undoing all his recent edits. Unfortunately, this left the article internally inconsistent with regard to era style, which I attempted to clean up by changing the whole article to BCE/CE. This seemed a reasonable solution to me, since the article references a set of religious beliefs and practices unconnected to Christianity.

I certainly realize that when one tries to clean up messes like this and amasses a significant history of edits to era styles, it's easy to leave a wrong impression about one's intentions. My only hope at avoiding this is to be as transparent and straightforward about responding to concerns, thus my lengthy reply. Please don't hesitate to communicate with me again, should you have any concerns. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you entirely. Only in confrontations on the era style does one look to the earliest use. BC/AD always belongs in articles on Christian subjects; in non-Christian archaeology the convention is often unsuitable: do you remember the unintentional comedy in the title of One Million B.C. with Victor Mature?--Wetman (talk) 01:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Can't say I remember that film, but I've heard of it. I suppose the comedy had to do with the fact that there were no humans that long ago and/or he was running around fighting dinosaurs?

I don't want to beat a dead horse on the era style issue, but I think my understanding still differs a little from yours and if I'm going to do more cleanup, (which I intend to), I'd feel better about achieving a little consensus first. The way I understand it, there were, at one time, vicious edit wars going on about this which resulted in two things happening. First, some of the more tendentious editors left the project to start Conservapedia. And second, a cease-fire was declared with the agreement that acceptable edits to era style would only include (1) reversions of violations of the cease-fire, (2) edits that had a substantive reason behind them, supported by consensus, and (3) edits to make an article internally consistent. If my understanding is correct, this really has nothing to do with the original era style of the article but is meant to stop tendentious editors, scouring Wikipedia making wholesale changes for no better reason than it's "correct" (i.e. they like it). Please give me your thoughts, whether you agree, disagree, or partially agree. I don't want to be taken for a date warrior, and I don't want to blunder into trouble. I made a slight correction to my above comment and one to yours. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 07:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

No, whatever happened in the film, it's the absurd cultural perspective that makes the very title One Million B.C. inherently comic. I've rarely had traumatic experiences over this issue, which is essentially one of enough common-sense not to transgress the usual usage in a field and enough taste not to press one's own opinion. Once when I very cautiously posted an editor's talkpage that changing BCE/CE to BC/AD was undesirable, I got quite a toxic blast for my trouble. Internal consistency avoids unnecessary and distracting confusion, but consistency is never a virtue in itself. I have noticed in the past four years that spelling is mis"corrected" to American usage but almost never the other way, and that "corrections" of era style are almost invariably from BCE/CE to BC/AD.? It's a class thing, to be quite frank, and so I recuse myself. Wikipedia when I arrived in September 2003 was very distinctly American, suburban, Christianist and lower-middle-class.: it's broader now. --Wetman (talk) 09:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Sappho

Your input would be appreciated on the article Sappho and the debate on its Talk page. I am trying to add a Music section to this article since it is an important part of Sappho's life. Presently there is nothing mentioned as her being associated with music. I put in my edits yesterday on a complete section about Music, however they have been totally removed as being inappropriate. In the Talk page I have given my reasons why I believe these are appropriate with many references showing each point of the 10 sentences - marked in bold. Any additions, improvements, or comments would be helpful. Thanks.--Doug ^talk 20:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The editor you are struggling with seems to have controlled that article for the last year. Sappho and music is a perfectly sensible section to add, and the hurdles you are asked to jump, while not perfectly wholesome in motivation, aren't that high. Collect together any Classical allusions to Sappho and musical instruments, and work direct quotes into your text, footnoted. I think you should eliminate some of the very general references you give, and with the remainder you should give the bibliographical details (author, title, journal if any, year, page), adding the explanatory commentary you have there, if it seems applicable. Do your editing right there on the Talkpage, and give a brief summary of what you're changing in posts. The atmosphere seems a bit toxic, and I prefer not to interfere directly. --Wetman (talk) 00:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you a fan of Ezekiel?

I mean in biblical studies. Because I have heard that "Son of Man" is a biblical identifier signifing blasphomy as opposed to the rightous "Son of God" identifier. I had also heard that "Son of Man" was referenced by christ and other Old Testament Prophets around the acpocolyptic writings as an idetifiers for the false prophets? I was wondering if you had heard or knew of the same.--207.14.129.217 (talk) 20:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

No I like Ruth. You'd probably enjoy the Apocalypse of Peter: lots of descriptions of torment: Schadenfreude. Log in, to be taken seriously. --Wetman (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

No No by all means mearlly an academic question. Not into biting the heads off of little kitty cats. Yet Ezekiel does involve the "Son of Man" prophesy that deals with alot of pain and suffering to quite a few. I must addmitt that statement on the discusion page about "word for word" lead me to the same conclusions about yourself. Mearlly an academic question though.--207.14.129.217 (talk) 04:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Spellborn from the Chronicles disambigation page

Why, please, is it inapropriate to add a full fledged Wikipedia article to the disambiguation page ? Just because that certain game isn't released, yet, doesn't invalidate the article.

You might challange the article itself, but I can't see a reason why the article should exist, yet the connected disambiguation not. Mind that many other not-yet-released games equally have lengthy articels, etc...

Langeweile (talk) 03:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

What would be the use to the Wikipedia reader of a "disambiguating" link at Chronicle (disambiguation) to a non-existent article— "Spellborn Chronicle"— concerning a supposed forthcoming game, one that "Langeweile" has been logged-in entirely to push? Special:Contributions/Langeweile make the motivation perfectly plain. No reader entering "Chronicle" is expecting to see "Langeweile"'s advertisement for this unrelated product. Clear enough for you? --Wetman (talk) 04:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Save your snark.

• Just because you're longer on Wikipedia (for whatever reason) doesn't let you inherently carry more rights than a new user. Nor is my prefered nickname in any way your issue to criticise.
• There was no link into the void, but one to a lengthy article: The Chronicles of Spellborn
• If you still feel I'm pushing or something, go and challenge that article. Good luck...

Langeweile (talk) 04:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

(copied to Talk:Spellborn)

Wetman's resources of patience and forbearance are in perennially short supply. Principles of triage require that no more of these reserves be expended than any one situation requires. Your understanding is appreciated.

Re. Queluz

Hello Wetman, glad to know my pictures are appreciated. :-) I used to live very close to the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation/Museum, but not anymore so I don't go there very often now. I don't know if I'll go there again before January, but if I do I may take some pictures as well. However, I'm not sure if I would be able to take pictures of the interior as easily as I did at the Queluz Palace. Gulbenkian has more visitors and surveillance, and the light inside is mostly artificial, so pictures would hardly have the same quality as that of the spacious, daylight-flooded rooms of the Queluz Palace. I'm not sure if there's any French furniture there, but I plan to visit my favorite Portuguese palace within the next few weeks, Pena Palace. I seem to worship the entire structure. I've never actually visited the rooms of the Pena Palace, but according to a friend of mine, "the decoration inside is so vivid and detailed that it almost seems like the queen has just left her bedroom to go the bathroom and will be back in a jiffy". Monserrate Palace also has a very interesting architecture, but the last time I was there it was empty. In fact, anything about Sintra is worth writing about. I can only think of the immense material we can use for that article when we decide to bring it to featured status. There's so much, that I wouldn't know where to start. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 04:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't want you to get your camera confiscated at the Gulbenkian Collection, but next time you're there, think "Rococo French furniture" and "French silver". Definitive examples! If they're for Wikipedia, single items make the best illustrations for objects. Giano II will be galvanised into editing action by your palace illustrations. --Wetman (talk) 07:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

FAC Wormshill

Hi, having worked with you (some time ago) on Gatton Park, I wondered if you could take a look at my FAC Wormshill. Appreciate it's out of your normal subject arena but would value any comments as to prose issues or blatant MOS problems. Cheers Dick G (talk) 00:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's a Featured Article all right, Dick! Look over my tweaks and revert any that don't seem to be improvements: they were mostly for tighter, more thrifty language, but do vet them to see that I've not ignorantly warped statements. I figure from your silence that Wormshill does not appear in Pevsner's Kent: I don't have it here. I was interested in the unremarked population spike in the mid-C19. The post-1970s hobbist nature of the railway should be touched: is the right-of-way old? If so, what was it built for? Did the ownership of Norwood pass by inheritance through most of those families? you mention one. The listing for natural beauty is self-explanatory, but the Scientific Interest listing needs explication: why is it of scientific interest? I wanted to know. The C13 chest in the church would be well worth a photo: C15 chests are quite numerous, but not C13; perhaps it's a bit ratty-looking? --Wetman (talk) 07:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, plenty to think about there. I made a couple of typo changes. Have not even looked at Pevsner's Kent (shame on me), will try and dig it out. Lack of sources mean it's hard to attribute the population spike to anything other than economic conditions. The copyeditor and I pondered this before couching it in vague terms... Railway is an oddity. The website is written tongue-in-cheek with a faux history of a failed mid-Kent rural rail line - not much help! No way of dating the right of way; most in the area are ancient tracks. Any 'significance' applied would be speculative OR. Will try and expand the SSSI accreditation rationale and a photo of the C13 chest is on the web somewhere, will dig that out...Thanks for stopping by. Dick G (talk) 08:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Then you're not sorry you asked.--Wetman (talk)

Hugely! Dick G (talk) 10:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

My family lived in Kent. They left in 1638...--Wetman (talk) 10:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah '38, a tough year... Were they Men of Kent or Kentish Men? Dick G (talk) 11:02, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Kentish men, with kin in Sussex. I misspoke: 1642 was the year, an even tougher year, in fact. I wonder whether the distinction that was revived by C19 antiquarians, was a living one to Kentish men and men of Kent in 1642. --Wetman (talk) 11:27, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I shouldn't think as folk assembled on Penenden Heath for Wyatt's Rebellion or later for Goring & co. in 1648 that much conversation was made as to their Kentish men (or otherwise) credentials...Dick G (talk) 11:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

That was uncalled for

You had no right to summarily remove all my contributions from the El (god) page. If any of it was untrue according to the Hebrew Scriptures then you should have only removed those parts you can prove to be untrue & left the rest (or just remove all New Testement references & left the Old Testement references stand). The page as you left it is severely biased to the secular view that there is no single Almighty God with a single identity or that Yahweh is the same as other pagan gods; that view is very false from the standpoint of the Tanakh, the Hebrew Scriptures. If you do not correct this I will file an official complaint against you with Wikipedia's proprietors. Please fix this now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.155.104.218 (talk) 21:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

(Wetman doesn't respond to anonymous posts)

St Werburgh

Thanks for your addition to St Werburgh's Church, Warburton. After writing this article I decided to write a disambig page about the churches, St Werburgh's Church, and surprisingly I found that out of a total (to date) of 10 churches dedicated to her only three are/were in the historical county of Cheshire. In Bristol an area of the city is called St Werburghs. There is of course a St Werburgh's Street in Chester. St Werburgh's remains were removed to Chester and the original abbey in Chester was dedicated to her. But it seems her influence was felt further afield! Thought you might find that interesting (I did). Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I do! Ten dedications is a surprisingly large number. And Bristol is outside the circuit of Mercia, though Wulfhere of Mercia was a power throughout the south, I guess. Could you get the gist of what you've unearthed into the article Werburgh?

A few minor amendments to Werburgh made. Enough? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

That fills out the picture. --Wetman (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Found 5 more - one in Dublin. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I've added the Catholic Encyclopedia reference, a bit treacly; if one is able to translate its perfumed Christianese to the practical modalities of the politics of power, and read the numerous royal saints as awarded "Rt. Hon." or "OBE", one can see the conversion of Mercia— through a Christian princess once again— and the alliance of Kentish and Mercian families. So! Werburgh isn't obscure at all: I was the one who was obscure! You've opened a new avenue for me. I'd better do some reading. Thank you.--Wetman (talk) 19:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Route Napoléon

I have reverted your edit, which was creating quite a mess with Firefox. Hope you don't mind. Cheers. olivier (talk) 21:18, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

...but I'm running Firefox. Back to the big blank spaces I guess.--Wetman (talk) 04:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

A zany edit to Theseus

A new edit has been submitted to this article. External links were removed. The edit presents a new, well articulated argument that goes against traditional views. Kirkus, one of the most respected national review organizations finds it "intriguing" yet you find it an amateur's blurb and you delete it. Some online publications carry it on their news page, yet you do not want it included in Wikipedia. At any rate, the external link issue is a valid one. I will consider a needed external link under the External Link category. If you have something positive to contribute, please do and leave the amateur blurbs for a different category.Geosop (talk) 07:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

George Sopasakis opened an account, as New User:Geosop, 23 December 2007 with the apparent purpose of entering a puff of his own decidedly quirky self-published "book" linking Theseus, Gilgamesh, the Egyptian Book of the Dead and... Jesus!——with a link to a website offering his book for sale. I reverted the edit. His User Contributions sufficiently tell the story. A look at WP:COI explains why this material is a conflict of interest, as well as being not acceptably encyclopedic. The edit has been reverted a second time. These posts have been copied to Talk:Theseus where they would be pursued, if that were necessary. --Wetman (talk) 08:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Wetman's resources of patience and forbearance are in perennially short supply. Principles of triage require that no more of these reserves be expended than any one situation requires. Your understanding is appreciated.

Buon Natale e buon anno! Giano (talk) 20:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Neutrally expressed and sourced text

Well hello Wetman, we don't seem to be able to keep away from each other. Now, for this text, I'm not denying it is neutrally expressed and sourced. So are many texts about the other side of the moon, but they are not relevant to the Dorians. Its the relevance I question. Is this your writing? It isn't bad writing, I don't deny, but so is a lot of writing about many topics. I see these statements as concerning our view of the Dorians and the 5th century view of the Dorians. The problem is, they don't explain what they mean! They don't tell us anything at all. What is the view being expressed in the source? Hey? It is not stated. So, in order just to make the idea understood, the editor (you?) has to add more and if he is going to do that it really belongs in another section, does it not? It isn't actually about the Dorians, it is about our view of the Dorians. So my reaction was to take it out! But I admit one can just as well put an expanded form of it back in, not in the intro, but in a separate section. I just don't see that being done. For now I am responding to the request for more serious citations, which means expanding the article a bit (not too much I hope). I hope to get it in the order of the Battle of Thermopylae. Those paragraphs can stay there for now. They are not in error as far as I know; they just don't say anything except to suggest the reader look up this fellow's opinions in the cited source. My feeling is the editor should have done that and have given the view. I invite YOU to do it. If nobody does it by the time I finish and you and others still think it should be in there, then it appears I will have to try to do it. If I can't get the source and you insist, well, it's not enough to raise an issue over, so it will have to stay, but in my mind the article is the less for it. By the way, I'd sure like to know myself what the argument is, as all the sources are very clear about the distinction. He must have in mind those Dorian states that did not wish to throw in with the Dorians or the city of Corinth, which didn't act like Dorians, but until I can get access or someone tells me I have no way to know. That is the point. By the way you can put that tag wherever you like, but when I finish it is coming out unless you or someone can prove that it shouldn't. ciao and I am hoping we can all settle this in a reasonable manner at a lower level as I have no intent of getting off these articles until they start saying things that are right.Dave (talk) 17:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Wetman simply "restored inadvertently deleted neutrally expressed and sourced text", as his edit summary put it, at Dorians; the deleted text began with the incontrovertible observation. "The degree to which fifth-century Hellenes self-identified as "Ionian" or "Dorian" has itself been disputed", a statement that was footnoted (see diff). The question does undercut much anhistorical and simplistic modern "ethnic" discourse, a fact which in itself renders the subject relevant. An image of "Dorians" has figured in the history of ideas since Karl Otfried Müller gave a revised sketch of them (in English, 1839), providing the popular view— still uncritically treasured by some, one senses. Suppressing text, which apparently needs to be more explicit and extensive, not less, is not really the same as editing it. Wetman didn't connect the deletion with anyone in particular and still doesn't. This text is being copied to Talk:Dorians. --Wetman (talk) 18:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK Pan

Did you know that....when you delete links it good to read the pages before hand?......................? That Pan and Boujeloud are one in the same and AGAIN did you read the page before deleting the See Also link ? ie "The Cd records the music of Boujeloud or Pan, the ancient diety still recognised in the small Moroccan village of Joujouka" Happy holidays. Opiumjones 23 (talk) 02:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

"Boujeloud is a CD by the Moroccan Sufi trance musicians Master Musicians of Joujouka." The Wikipedia article is essentially a flyer for this CD. A purported connection to Pan (mythology)? too slender to be a "See also" link. --Wetman (talk) 10:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)