→I no longer edit FAC article or review, nor FACR: new section |
|||
Line 224: | Line 224: | ||
I think enough is enough and if the problems have not stopped in the last month it needs to go to ArbCom. Sorry Giano :-) --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 16:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC) |
I think enough is enough and if the problems have not stopped in the last month it needs to go to ArbCom. Sorry Giano :-) --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 16:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
::Well as you know I have limited confidence in Arbcom, although this new lot have yet to be tested, and even the old Arbcom would have a job twisting this one to nclude me - so it will be interesting to see what happens. [[User:Giano II|Giano]] ([[User talk:Giano II#top|talk]]) 16:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC) |
::Well as you know I have limited confidence in Arbcom, although this new lot have yet to be tested, and even the old Arbcom would have a job twisting this one to nclude me - so it will be interesting to see what happens. [[User:Giano II|Giano]] ([[User talk:Giano II#top|talk]]) 16:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
== I no longer edit FAC article or review, nor FACR == |
|||
This should take care of the problem. It has been made amply clear that I am not wanted there, so I accept that. I hope this will allow me some peace. I am not I perfect person by any means by I was doing the best I could there editing and reviewing. I was not good enough. I was heavily criticize, so I will go. I am not a quick with words as you, so I concede that I cannot stand up for myself with you, and I am not allowed to use the words and accusation you do as they the are collected ended up in extremely ugly RFC, the point of which was to point out my every fault in a magnified way with the goal of driving me way. I did think that I was helping at FAC at the time because I received so many rewards and much praise. But praise is meaningless, I know, as FAC wants me gone. You are not the only one who does. Regards, —[[User:Mattisse|<font color="navy">'''Mattisse'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Mattisse|Talk]]) 15:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:44, 4 February 2009
File:Animalibrí.gif
Please note there is now a designated area for complaining about me here (I do check it from time to time). This talk page is now only for important and interesting matters. Giano (talk) 11:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Old messages are at:
- User talk:Giano II/archive 1 (2004)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 2 (2005)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 3 (2005)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 4 (2006)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 5 (2006)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 6 (2007)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 7 (2007)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 8 (2008)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 9 (2008)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 10 (2009)
Essays:
Please leave new messages below
Happy slush-trudging season
I was going to say Happy New Year, Giano; but in my part of the world where these matters are regimented, the New Year has ritually ended, and what I should instead write on my postcard is that I humbly look at and dance for you while it's cold. So as we at the extremes of Eurasia move from commercial fantasizing about a "white Christmas" to actual trudging through grey slush, my warmest regards to you, though I'll spare you the dancing.
In the last couple of days I've observed and been tangentially involved in some of the silliest WP groupthink and clearest repudiation of this, so I'm more than normally interested by your essay, which I intend to print out tomorrow and read in the train. -- Hoary (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well I have just arrived here to find real live grey slush, trains cancelled, and Britain in its usual state of chaos at 0.5cm of snow; and explaining to overexited tiny olive skinned ones that one cannot tobaggan or ski in grey slush. Such is my exiting life. Giano (talk) 12:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Right then, all jump into your car, or a friend's car, or a hotwired enemy's car -- you sedentary Brits have surplus millions of cars, this should be easy -- and drive to Uffington. Look for a parkplatz for the horse and castle. You'll all be impressed (and likely frozen too). I've found that it impresses guests from afar in warm weather and cold, though of course sleet doesn't help. It can be blowy up there; I remember thinking the skin on my hand might freeze onto my camera when I once changed film [remember that stuff?] up there at a temperature that actually was probably no less than 3°C. Fleece and down, that's the ticket. -- Hoary (talk) 15:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well I have just arrived here to find real live grey slush, trains cancelled, and Britain in its usual state of chaos at 0.5cm of snow; and explaining to overexited tiny olive skinned ones that one cannot tobaggan or ski in grey slush. Such is my exiting life. Giano (talk) 12:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I remember slush… vaguely. Hey, Happy New Year. If I can be of any help with stuff, I'd be glad to chip-in. It's going to be a good year; be happy. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Advice
Hi Giano,
I've just finished reading your article, 'A fool's guide to writing a featured article', plus a few other examples of your work, which I have generally found to be of a very high standard.
As I am relatively new on Wikipedia (started 15 September 2008), I am looking for some guidance.
Currently I have been working on article Pope John Paul II, with an aim to raise it to 'Good article' and eventually 'Featured article' hopefully. I wonder if I could be so bold as to ask you to have a look and give me your honest opinion. I would appreciate any tips, pointers, advice (or even collaboration, if you have the time and/or interest). Any help would be greatly appreciated on my part. Kind Regards, Marek.69 talk 18:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I don't do GAs, and am no longer writing FAs, but that looks like a very good page to me, a little tidying arownd the edges and it ought to be a FA. However, and this is serious advice, if that is your first attempt at an FA - then leave the late Pope alone. He is far too famous and contraversial, to FAC him he would be a minefield - the page would never be comprehensive enough for some, and a magnet for the POV of others. Find an easier target to cut your FAC teeth with - this would be a disparaging experience for a FAC novice, it can be disparaging enough for those of us who know are way arownd the place [1]; when you see reviewers begin "I haven't read the article, but..." then it is time to leave FACs alone. If you chose to ignore my advice (and most people do), let me know and I will help you out with it, to see if it can be FAd, but I strongly advise against it - make the page as good as you can, then go enjoy yourself with another page, and forget FAing the late Pope. Giano (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Giano on the FA stuff. The system appears to have serious issues with even remotely controversial subjects these days. It looks like a pretty good article to me. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 19:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Giano, I appreciate you taking a look and your advice. I still have a lot of input to add to this page, so I will be making the page as good as I can. If you have any suggestions, please drop me a line. As for the FA, I have no intention of walking into a minefield just yet, so I might just put that off for the time being. I'll let you know if I change my mind. Cheers Marek.69 talk 21:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- The point is, do you think it's good enough yet? Once it's good enough, fair and well-rounded and quite thorough, then I'd move on for a while, work on something else, then come back and review it yourself, privately, to your own standards. And carry it forth in that way. Wikipedia articles are never "finished". And if they are a great deal better than the average, they'll attract undesirable attention, like Buckingham Palace.---Wetman (talk) 23:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Wetman, personally, I don't think the article is good enough yet. It's a little disjointed in places and could flow a lot better. I am working on this. Also a lot of the ‘facts’ need to be checked, I've started, but still long way to go, and its been mentioned that weblinks need formatting. So I think it still needs a fair amount of work before it's good enough. As previously mentioned, I am not in any particular hurry to take this to FA, so in the meantime I'm just enjoying myself improving it and would welcome any help and collaboration. Cheers. Marek.69 talk 10:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- I think the problem is the praiseful tone. Wikipedia is not hagiography. Bishonen | talk 13:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC).
- If he is canonized it will be hagiography. No way round that. Yomanganitalk 14:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Clearly, you haven't seen Talk:Sarah Palin lately.
- When I saw Bish with an edit summary of "hagiography" I thought, oh good! Giano is writing a bio of Bishonen! But alas, such is not the case... KillerChihuahua?!? 13:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, all right, so it is hagiography. [/me starts a page on User:Little Stupid, and another on User:Silly Little Puppy ]. Bishonen | talk 13:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC).
- I think the problem is the praiseful tone. Wikipedia is not hagiography. Bishonen | talk 13:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC).
- Hi Wetman, personally, I don't think the article is good enough yet. It's a little disjointed in places and could flow a lot better. I am working on this. Also a lot of the ‘facts’ need to be checked, I've started, but still long way to go, and its been mentioned that weblinks need formatting. So I think it still needs a fair amount of work before it's good enough. As previously mentioned, I am not in any particular hurry to take this to FA, so in the meantime I'm just enjoying myself improving it and would welcome any help and collaboration. Cheers. Marek.69 talk 10:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
user page
Hi. If you would like, I could build you a next generation user page. I did just tweak the 'vile colour'. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- What a good idea, so long as it is restrained and tasteful (like me), and has none of those nasty horrid little boxes announcing I speak little Mandarin, virtually no Portuguese and like to live an alternative lifestyle you can do what you like to it. Giano (talk) 13:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Great. I'll take a stab at something tomorrow ( it's getting late here ;) I'll likely put it a subpage for your comments. I'm no fan of all the silly boxes, so no worries there. I'll look at what you've done, got parked as subpages, mebbe Lady Bonkbuster. Leave a few ideas, if you like. Think of it as a portal to your work. Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:33, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- "A portal"? Goodness, I have never had one of those. Just think I can direct people to my portal when they complain I don't write enough, I shall enjoy that. Giano (talk) 15:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Or portfolio… I do wicked humour, too (see my pages). This will be fun. Thanks. It is your userspace, so you da boss. Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- No, no, I'd like a portal like a large proscenium arch framing the page - very architectural - that people can pass through - of course Spumoni has to stay too. Giano (talk) 16:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can do that; will go on an image hunt. There must be lovely stuff out there. A nice architectural rendering of some great building. Blueprints, hi-res photos of great theaters, &c.. I know a _lot_ about theatre. Cheers, (and good night) Jack Merridew 16:48, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not a theatre one an Baroque one, something like the one at the centre of this this would be good Giano (talk) 16:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be looking at a bunch of images. There are a couple of ways to go here; I'm thinking a very symmetrical bit of imagery framing the content in the middle; if it's muted a bit (almost a watermark) text can go right over parts of it. This will take a few iterations along the lines of; See? and getting feedback. This is why I'll work on a test page until you like. I'll probably tweak your main page in the right direction in parallel. Anything you don't like, revert or tweak, of course. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
See;
The specific image, colours and text can easily change (as could the dog bit, which I saw a cartoon-strip about here recently). The image should have reasonable left/right symmetry and be fairly tall if you want much text over it. This whole approach will not work for long pages. We could, simply do something else below the image; something like a portal; Portal:Architecture or one of the others. Another option is smallish boxes with vertical scrolling; I don't much like these.
You want an edit notice on your talk page, too? see mine for lulz; the specific message varies over time.
Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:41, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- That's very good, but could we look through the arch (minus the gates) and see this, (the main part - centred) and then click on a different window for a different department - complaints - pages - requests etc? Giano (talk) 09:47, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't see your reply immediately; I've been tweaking things, so look again. Refresh now, and see each oldid;
- Winter Palace gate zoomed-in
- Winter Palace gate
- right now, it's using;
- File:Tempietto05.jpg with zooming. oldid
- I'll change to the image you suggest next. And I can make the windows into links; I think, wiki can be limiting.
- Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't see your reply immediately; I've been tweaking things, so look again. Refresh now, and see each oldid;
- I've switched to File:Queluz Palace fountains.JPG and am still thinking about the window links.
- You're thinking of a composite image, right? The Russian Arch and the Portuguese Palace? That would be best done in Photoshop which is not my strong suit (and I've not looked at the licenses on these images). Maybe get Durova to help? Ya, I know... there be drama afoot, but maybe we could all just sit down and share a crack pipe or two, and let shite go. I'll proceed on my own for now. Cheers. Jack Merridew 11:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- No really I do not require Durova's help - it would be mentioned for ever more and eternal gratitude required. I can make composite images - I think - and will do that, then the same principal as a clicky map can be applied - Gosh this is going to be so impressive people will come from miles around just to stand and stare at my portal. Giano (talk) 11:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- I certainly hesitated before that post. I've not been following the details of late. The windows can certainly be done, it's just messier on a wiki as opposed to on a website you have full control over. Keep the image large and hi-res. I'm zooming in on the interesting parts of the images. If you crop away uninteresting bits, fine, but big is good. You are running a largish screen, right; it fits for you? For something like this I care little about crappy computers and browsers. We're thinking grand here. Glad you're liking it. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:40, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- The two windows on the left of the second floor are 'hot' — for the moment, they link to your user and talk pages with plain titles on them (the balloon when you hover over them). Damn things are a bitch to calibrate; not quite sure why, but it's certainly related to the games I'm using to move the image around and clip overflow. You're not seeing the whole image on the portal page; compare with the original. We can put little labels under the windows, too; links, or not… Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- For something like this I care little about crappy computers and browsers. Right now I'm using a fine browser on a crappy computer. What me to throw away the latter and add to landfill and global warming? Usability, Jack: how does it look in Amaya? Or Lynx? Ask yourself: What would Jakob say? Best of luck with it! -- Hoary (talk) 15:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- I do have Amaya, however I don't use it. Its rendering of that page reinforced that. It is an authoring tool, not a regular browser, so I'm not surprised. Lynx I don't use; there's no hope there. I have tested this on a bunch of browsers and it is coded with solid techniques. Give me access to the raw xhtml and style sheets and I'll do better. There certainly is room for improvment in wiki's accessibility. I also checked it on my handphone; it was still usable. Switching to an image sized for this purpose will help with some of the issues. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC) (I don't get the Jakob reference, but fear I should)
- Thanks I am working on a composite picture as we speak. Giano (talk) 20:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- This is what I had in minsd File:Domus G.jpg with all the windows and doors leading to a user page: Pages I like, pages I am working on, awards, complaints, arb cases (and other such things) that have amused me, keeping diffs that may be useful or make people laugh, ect ect ect. Giano (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can use that; I've saved a local copy and will nudge this along as I can. The pages you'd like linked with be subpages such as;
- User:Giano II/Awards containing most of the current user page
- others about the same... subpages can get nice treatments, too.
- Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can use that; I've saved a local copy and will nudge this along as I can. The pages you'd like linked with be subpages such as;
- I like the portal idea of this one can the main talk page be the big window in the middle? Thanks. Giano (talk) 08:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Ya, any rectangle in the image can be a link. We could have hidden one; some piece of the sky...
- fyi, this may have to wait a bit due to real life issues. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Updated; I've changed images again and have linked all of the second floor windows. You should make a list of just what you would like. The image is a bit off-centre and I've nudged it and cropped off a few bits. It would be best if the image was exactly symmetrical. Also, it would be best to leave all text out of the image so that it can be changed and formatted. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- (ec) I see you like. Enjoy. fyi, the left window links to the user page itself so you should find another target. Shuffle as you see fit; you should be fine as long as you're careful with any tweaks to the code. Adding imagemap rects is fairly straightforward. If you want more text in the box, the size needs adjusting. This could probably be made automatic; just didn't yet. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh thank you, this is marvellous isn't it - so much more eficient I shall start transfering all the moaning minnies above to their own area in a momant. Giano (talk) 11:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- (ec2) I can add formatting to whatever page you end up with. I just added the Prologue page to this talk page; I see this as something for all pages; at least that's how I see it. Consider an WP:Editnotice for your talk page. Really try mine; It offers on of about a dozen Lord of the Flies quotes. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh that's great, can we move the text to the first window and start a page caled Giano on Giano? Also can we do away with beware the dog and have Spumoni (my bird) flying all over the page? Giano (talk) 11:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'll cut the dog; the image I'll have to think on a moment; it's certainly doable. I didn't realise the bird was 'Spumoni'. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Done. You want the whole text box gone? i.e at User:Giano II/Giano (which left window links to); just so you know; an urn down-right links to my user page; cut if you like, it was just a demo of a non-window link. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- yep I thik so, no leave your urn that will be handy, could Bishonen's talk hace a downstairs window, it would be happy to have a quick link to her, on and geogre's page I often quite like to look at what is happening there. Good isn't it?
- I added the first floor links; some of the links are duplicates of second floor ones; change them to whatever you like. I think you should keep the translucent box; it's cool. This whole page is cool; there be some nice tricks in there. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Nice picture. GoodDay (talk) 18:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
As a relaxing diversion, could I tempt you to cast your eye over Arley Hall, ahead of its GA nomination? I know the prose still needs some work, and that's in hand, but your architectural expertise would be invaluable. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Nice page, nice fotos, but it needs a heavy copy-edit, I will have a proper look tomorrow. In the meantime - does it have to have "design team" for one man in the info box? I will leave the need for an info box to you, Giano (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not the author of the article, but I'm kind of persuaded by infoboxes, although I realise that you're not such a fan. Anyway, thanks for agreeing to take a look. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- You want an info box, you can have one, the primary authors get to chose. I have given one para some architectural terms and tightened up. I'll take anoter look tomorrow. It's late. Giano (talk) 23:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Nice page, nice fotos, but it needs a heavy copy-edit, I will have a proper look tomorrow. In the meantime - does it have to have "design team" for one man in the info box? I will leave the need for an info box to you, Giano (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the work you have done on this. I wondered how you came across it - and then discovered the message on MF's talk page. Any more improvements welcomed; it's pretty obvious I am not a professional writer! Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:58, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Moscow Kremlin
Hey Giano, I am going to try and get a group of editors together in order to expand greatly our coverage of the Moscow Kremlin. Just look at the number of articles to be created and expanded....
If I can get a few editors together, would you be interested in joining us? --Russavia Dialogue 09:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- to be honest, I don't want to comit to anything further until I have finished the Winter Palace series, I still have one page left to finish there. Thanks for asking, if you have any problems with the 18th and 19thcentury stuff give me a call, I am not too familiar with Russian architecture before then. I do have a book about the contents of the kremlin if that is nay help. Giano (talk) 11:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
FYI. NVO (talk) 03:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- Addressed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Giano (talk) 13:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
"It is a term used to encompass all aesthetically led architectural styles and fashions."
- Is this what architectural theory has come to? Please point me towards the exit. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm afraid CoM whether you like it or not the term polite architecture exists and is used fairly frequently, especially in the UK in conservation areas and the work pertaining to them. I'm not sure that I agree that it is "a term used to encompass all aesthetically led architectural styles and fashions." That seems a little to encompasing and sweeping. I saw written somewhere in this debate over the last day or so that Blenheim Palace could be described ar polite architecture, I don't agree with that at all, because that particular house was breaking new ground at the time it was built, so obviously the page is going to have to be pretty well referenced to suport such views. It's a complex subject so it needs to be written by someone who understands it too. However, it is very much a page Wikipedia needs to have and I shall read it with great interest. Giano (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, all architecture has an aesthetic. Whether it's a Mies box or a Gropius or a Falling Concrete Wright construction, it's "aesthetically led." I can see how the sentence is a real stinker, and it doesn't communicate to this amateur consumer of architecture (I consume architecture non-professionally). Is it architecture whose sole purpose is aesthetic? (Are there such things outside of follies?) Is it architecture built in imitation of an existing aesthetic?
- I think I get it, but I don't, really. It would seem to denote architecture whose function was to primarily establish class membership or as a display of wealth. Thus, a London house for a country squire that was dripping with ornaments would be "polite" architecture (with the root on "politic"), but to say that it is aesthetic in a particular manner misleads. Utgard Loki (talk) 13:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. I actually agree with you Giano and with you Utgard (I think your last paragraph has it about right). A building is polite in the sense that it follows high architectural period styles (of Europe) like the Baroque. My recollection is that it had to do with the nouveau riche building fancy houses with the artifice of the so-called high archiecture period styles like Baroque in order to blend in with the landed gentry aristocrats as part of an effort to take on the appearances of the aristocratic class with whom they wanted to socialize. Although there were certainly public buildings built in the style also, in a similar desire to be taken seriously. At the very least I hope someone clarifies in the article that this is a bit of architectural theorizing and no one actually set out to build a building that would be referred to as "polite architecture". Over here in the colonies, terminology of that sort is not well fancied. In fact, calling one of our buildings polite might be considered a bit of an insult. Is it ever wise to quiety kill a crazed piece of creative writing as the best way to get a more considered (not to mention sourced) article? Did you see that the Eiffel Tower is being referred to as polite architecture as well? I tried to focus the article a bit, but wild horses or cats are easier to tame. I suppose some sources will have to be hunted down, but reading haughty British architectural theorizing isn't my first choice for a weekend activity. Cheerio! ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- In short: if you want to see "polite architcture" go to England's nothern towns where newly rich mill owners built Italianate, villas complete with belvedere towers; Gothic revival churches and Renaissance chapels (for the good of their own souls rather then those of their exploited workes) all out of the local stone using local architects who never quite understood the plot or had the resources to fully endorse it. Giano (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm afraid CoM whether you like it or not the term polite architecture exists and is used fairly frequently, especially in the UK in conservation areas and the work pertaining to them. I'm not sure that I agree that it is "a term used to encompass all aesthetically led architectural styles and fashions." That seems a little to encompasing and sweeping. I saw written somewhere in this debate over the last day or so that Blenheim Palace could be described ar polite architecture, I don't agree with that at all, because that particular house was breaking new ground at the time it was built, so obviously the page is going to have to be pretty well referenced to suport such views. It's a complex subject so it needs to be written by someone who understands it too. However, it is very much a page Wikipedia needs to have and I shall read it with great interest. Giano (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
John Donne in St. Paul's?
Giano, a lot of sources record his tomb in St Paul's where he was Dean. Inigo Jones did a lot of work on old St Paul's before the fire. Did the monument survive, to be reinstalled? Here's the image. --Wetman (talk) 22:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Woops yes, my mistake it in St Paul's and must have somehow survived. The Holles statue is in the Abey. I wil revert myself. Giano (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
RFC
The RFC on you started out unfocused and ill-humored, but it's now just getting absurd. "I wuz once here and I saw a Giano. It turned me into a newt so i thinks it should be blocked" is about where they are now. Utgard Loki (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh? Is it still going on? I thought it had finished ages ago, that was why Phil was taking out an RF-Arb, one can't keep track these days - I must get around to putting them on my watch-list sometime. I see you have discovered my new "complaints department" do feel free to make use of it, such a useful facility I thought, alowing me to keep this page for more important maters and debate. Talking of newts have you hear the one about the newt, the dope smoking koala and the crocodile? Giano (talk) 21:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Will you please stop talking about the members of the ArbCom! I happen to have great faith in the crocodile. It says that it's sorry. Utgard Loki (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I was not talking about the Arbcom. For whom I have the very highest respect; I was talking about crocodiles, in particular Australian crocodiles (or alligators or whetever they call them in those parts) it was a very funny joke I heard at a dinner last week - apparently there is a dope smoking koala up a tree and along came a newt...........anyone wanting to here the joke has only to ask, but it is long and involved. Probably best to email. Come to think of it, I'm not sure I can rmember the punchline, I thik the newt (pronounced "noot" cos that's how Australians say newt) gets confused with the crocodile. Come to think of it Americans can't say the "yew" sound either, or at least George Dubya can't, I wonder why that is?Giano (talk) 20:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I've been told that Court Whigs changed the old pronunciation nu to reflect Dutch nieuw in the circle of William III, ca 1690-1700. Northerners, Cockneys and Americans didn't get the memo.--Wetman (talk) 03:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- I was not talking about the Arbcom. For whom I have the very highest respect; I was talking about crocodiles, in particular Australian crocodiles (or alligators or whetever they call them in those parts) it was a very funny joke I heard at a dinner last week - apparently there is a dope smoking koala up a tree and along came a newt...........anyone wanting to here the joke has only to ask, but it is long and involved. Probably best to email. Come to think of it, I'm not sure I can rmember the punchline, I thik the newt (pronounced "noot" cos that's how Australians say newt) gets confused with the crocodile. Come to think of it Americans can't say the "yew" sound either, or at least George Dubya can't, I wonder why that is?Giano (talk) 20:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Will you please stop talking about the members of the ArbCom! I happen to have great faith in the crocodile. It says that it's sorry. Utgard Loki (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh? Is it still going on? I thought it had finished ages ago, that was why Phil was taking out an RF-Arb, one can't keep track these days - I must get around to putting them on my watch-list sometime. I see you have discovered my new "complaints department" do feel free to make use of it, such a useful facility I thought, alowing me to keep this page for more important maters and debate. Talking of newts have you hear the one about the newt, the dope smoking koala and the crocodile? Giano (talk) 21:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Admin required
Could some kindly Admin please blend the histories of these tqo page User:Giano/Nicholas Stone and Nicholas Stone, and further information can be easily added to mainspace now. Thanks. Giano (talk) 12:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Done. :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, that is great. Giano (talk) 12:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- What is an OTRS account as described here File:Sandro Pertini6.jpg and can I use this image in my new page? Giano (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- You can use the pic, WP:OTRS is a system for recording free licenses that the WMF maintains and is run by volunteers. MBisanz talk 17:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. Very useful. Giano (talk) 17:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- You can use the pic, WP:OTRS is a system for recording free licenses that the WMF maintains and is run by volunteers. MBisanz talk 17:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- What is an OTRS account as described here File:Sandro Pertini6.jpg and can I use this image in my new page? Giano (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, that is great. Giano (talk) 12:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Random question
I was working on a totally unrelated matter, {Fashion Architecture Taste (FAT), and in case you want to have a look a couple of us also started the Kees Christiaanse and Wiel Arets articles. They could use some photos} and stumbled on a user that had previously created the same article (before it was deleted by a gunslinger). In looking into their contributions I saw that they in turn had deleted one of an anon's comments here (as from Moulton). Anyway, I had investigated the case of Moulton a while back, and I was wondering what ever happened to him? Is he still around or is he gone for good? I see Peter Damien is still able to conduct divisive and disruptive experiments to promote his off wiki endeavors, but from what little I gleaned Moulton's work, it seemed in the general spirit of inquiry at the heart of Wikipedia. Just curious. Sorry if I'm opening a can of worms. Chao! ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not at all, but I am not the best person to ask about these matters. You need to contact one of Wikipedia's WR regulars or even one of the Arbs who often posts there. I expect, they are all far better informed than me on such things - no one tells me anything. Giano (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Moulton is one of the rare handful of users (I know of maybe 3) who are actually banned from all 760+ WMF wikis[2]. Lar (talk · contribs) can give a better blow-by-blow, but suffice it to say, Peter's intentions and work are far superior to Moulton's. MBisanz talk 21:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- My observations of moulton's work were that he was interested in researches, not so much in 'encyclopedia'. PeterD is trying to work on the encyclopedia. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just a moment here, before we have a mass pile on of informative comment. I am not greatly interested in Moulton, in fact I have never come across him on Wikipedia - in short, he interest me not. When he starts making unhelpful edits to pages I edit, or making silly, puerile or banal comments concerning me or my interests on wikipedia then I will look into him. At the moment he does not, and there are plenty who do - so they get my attention. Nor am I remotely interested in medieval philosophy so my path with Peter D is unlikely to cross here either. Giano (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks all for the responses. I shouldn't have phrased my inquiry the way I did and have struck out my unsavory attacks. I would refactor, but I don't want to compound my errors. I take it from MBisanz's reply that the key difference is that Moulton wasn't much of a contributor then? When I say I investigated I should make clear that it was just cursory, and I found his work interesting. Anyway, I apologize for the disruption to your page Giano. Thanks to all for your responses and thoughts. Perhaps if there is more to say my talk page would be a better place to carry on the conversation. But my questions have generally been answered, so thanks again. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I wonder what Giano has against medieval philosophy? ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, your page would be a better place. I don't want to discuss people I do not know or have no interest in here (that goes for all others I have never interacted with too) I have nothing against medieval philosophy other than that I find it very dull and disinteresting, but I am delighted others do not find it so. Now can we terminate this thread now? Thank you. Giano (talk) 23:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just a moment here, before we have a mass pile on of informative comment. I am not greatly interested in Moulton, in fact I have never come across him on Wikipedia - in short, he interest me not. When he starts making unhelpful edits to pages I edit, or making silly, puerile or banal comments concerning me or my interests on wikipedia then I will look into him. At the moment he does not, and there are plenty who do - so they get my attention. Nor am I remotely interested in medieval philosophy so my path with Peter D is unlikely to cross here either. Giano (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- My observations of moulton's work were that he was interested in researches, not so much in 'encyclopedia'. PeterD is trying to work on the encyclopedia. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Moulton is one of the rare handful of users (I know of maybe 3) who are actually banned from all 760+ WMF wikis[2]. Lar (talk · contribs) can give a better blow-by-blow, but suffice it to say, Peter's intentions and work are far superior to Moulton's. MBisanz talk 21:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not at all, but I am not the best person to ask about these matters. You need to contact one of Wikipedia's WR regulars or even one of the Arbs who often posts there. I expect, they are all far better informed than me on such things - no one tells me anything. Giano (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Contemporary architecture
Giano, are you interested in any of the contemporary architects? Do you work on those articles? ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:15, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- I am working my way through history to get to them. Giano (talk) 07:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Clicky map
Hi Giano--good to see your head still above water. Yes, the clicky map will still be easy. I could add numbers to the image too... been meaning to sit down with Photoshop and do some work on Wiki anyways (I owe Casliber a map too--and now he's great and powerful!). Where would you want the numbers? If you have just a general idea, I can work up something quick and from there it's easy to move them around a bit. Probably easier to tell me move the 6 a little to the left after a rough draft than to try to explain exactly now. --JayHenry (talk) 04:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, replied on your page. Giano (talk) 07:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Mattisse RfC
In your Outside View, I added some references to Mattisse's disruption of the FAR process in her vexatious nomination of Buckingham Palace, so people can see a recent example of the bad behaviour you describe. (I agree it needs to go to an RFAR.) In case anybody removes my input for formal reasons, you might want to put it back and say you want it in there as part of your view. Diffs are useful! Bishonen | talk 10:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC).
- Thank you Bishonen, I think this is one of the few times, i have felt an editor to have gone beyond the pale and require permanent and lasting removal. Giano (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- I will take a look, too, later, I hope. The user, to me, has shown the sort of bad behavior that should at least lead to extreme restrictions, voluntary, and removal if he cannot abide by those restrictions. That said, I also think that this person's behavior is a mirror image of previous uses of these processes. FAC can be saved. FAR and FARC, on the other hand, are loaded guns laying on the parlor table. It's not surprising that a disgruntled party goer picks them up and begins firing. I cannot see any use to those two processes, and I have seen many instances of harm, and so all we have, in Mattisse, is what we had in Lucifer Morgan, or some of the now-admired users: the endless wrangling of formalism to justify personal pique. Yes, the person is wrong, but the person couldn't be so effectively disruptive without these two ready to wear insults. Geogre (talk) 12:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with you, but it is not the needless FARCing that is the main problem, it is this users general behaviour in many areas. There are very good and hard working editors, to mainspace, not necessarly friends of mine, but people I can, and do, work quite well with, whose lives have been made completely wretched by Mattisse - Sandy Georgia for one, their only crime being trying to do their given job. Mattisse's insults and allagations seem to be ignored in "certain circles", I suppose because "certain circles" do not interest themselves in mainspace. I can think of no other reason why this is tolerated, I certainly see no outstanding contributions only hampering and trouble to the building of the project. I have been ignoring her for too long, I should have spoken up earlier, now this stupid sanction is almost over I shall have to concern myself more with these matters, the problem is the second I go near an Arbcase there are those (some highly placed) who like to twist it to centre on me, so I have been too cautious of late.Giano (talk) 12:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- I will take a look, too, later, I hope. The user, to me, has shown the sort of bad behavior that should at least lead to extreme restrictions, voluntary, and removal if he cannot abide by those restrictions. That said, I also think that this person's behavior is a mirror image of previous uses of these processes. FAC can be saved. FAR and FARC, on the other hand, are loaded guns laying on the parlor table. It's not surprising that a disgruntled party goer picks them up and begins firing. I cannot see any use to those two processes, and I have seen many instances of harm, and so all we have, in Mattisse, is what we had in Lucifer Morgan, or some of the now-admired users: the endless wrangling of formalism to justify personal pique. Yes, the person is wrong, but the person couldn't be so effectively disruptive without these two ready to wear insults. Geogre (talk) 12:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you Bishonen, I think this is one of the few times, i have felt an editor to have gone beyond the pale and require permanent and lasting removal. Giano (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
I think enough is enough and if the problems have not stopped in the last month it needs to go to ArbCom. Sorry Giano :-) --Dweller (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well as you know I have limited confidence in Arbcom, although this new lot have yet to be tested, and even the old Arbcom would have a job twisting this one to nclude me - so it will be interesting to see what happens. Giano (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
I no longer edit FAC article or review, nor FACR
This should take care of the problem. It has been made amply clear that I am not wanted there, so I accept that. I hope this will allow me some peace. I am not I perfect person by any means by I was doing the best I could there editing and reviewing. I was not good enough. I was heavily criticize, so I will go. I am not a quick with words as you, so I concede that I cannot stand up for myself with you, and I am not allowed to use the words and accusation you do as they the are collected ended up in extremely ugly RFC, the point of which was to point out my every fault in a magnified way with the goal of driving me way. I did think that I was helping at FAC at the time because I received so many rewards and much praise. But praise is meaningless, I know, as FAC wants me gone. You are not the only one who does. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 15:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)