Victoriaearle (talk | contribs) →Invite: re |
Victoriaearle (talk | contribs) →Invite: a bit annoyed, anyone pls read |
||
Line 249: | Line 249: | ||
::::::I'll have the NG book in about 2 weeks. A week integrating, a week touching up, and then FAC. Witches Sabbath after than; I know its disjointed, but all the info is there, and lord god was it hard to come by. So some spruching should sort it out. Meanwhile, I want to build up the two articles I have on Gauguin, both have potential for a good read, and a full of drama, if I can draw them out. [[User talk:Ceoil|<font color="#006633">Ceoil</font>]] 14:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC) |
::::::I'll have the NG book in about 2 weeks. A week integrating, a week touching up, and then FAC. Witches Sabbath after than; I know its disjointed, but all the info is there, and lord god was it hard to come by. So some spruching should sort it out. Meanwhile, I want to build up the two articles I have on Gauguin, both have potential for a good read, and a full of drama, if I can draw them out. [[User talk:Ceoil|<font color="#006633">Ceoil</font>]] 14:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::::::So I should be back in time for the excitement on MM - that's good. Seem to be a little invested in her. Let me know, before I leave, if you want Paul's files resent for Oviri & the jug. I think Witches Sabbath is quite good btw. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88#top|talk]]) |
:::::::So I should be back in time for the excitement on MM - that's good. Seem to be a little invested in her. Let me know, before I leave, if you want Paul's files resent for Oviri & the jug. I think Witches Sabbath is quite good btw. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88#top|talk]]) |
||
== TK on Twitter == |
|||
I just stumbled across the fact that someone is posting links to my talkpage on Twitter - I don't know whether this happens frequently, but also don't know that it's necessary. Anyway, unfortunately I'll be keeping personal info such as travel plans, etc. off this page in the future. My email is always available too. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88#top|talk]]) 15:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:04, 24 April 2011
![]() |
Template:Archive box collapsible |
Hemingway Nobel Speech
Hi Truthkeeper88- The audio fragment is a from a well-known (but minimally documented) set of recordings that Hemingway made with a portable wire-recorder in his home. Most of these recordings were apparently done in Cuba, and several show him to be deep into the bottle-- although amusing and informative nonetheless. The ones that have been circulating for the past two decades come from a Caedmon Audio cassette/CD release called "Ernest Hemingway Reads Ernest Hemingway" (ISBN-13: 978-0898459586), and the copyright implies the rights are held by the Hemingway Estate (although truly, they provide almost no substantive information in the notes). I suppose I could add the track number (there of course is no page number)to flesh out the reference. The main point here, which I tried to clarify in my caption note (apparently not successfully) is that although Hemingway was not in Stockholm, this is the speech he prepared, and was read for him by U.S. Ambassador to Sweden John C. Cabot. LATER, apparently in December 1954, according to Caedmon, he recorded the speech at home with the wire-recorder. I added the fragment to the Wikipedia page just to give a flavor of Hemingway's speaking voice, which I find always adds another dimension to our understanding of an individual-- I'm thinking of young students who may working on a report, or just in curiosity about such a huge literary figure. Does that answer your concern? Seeker56 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seeker56 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- My concern is this: if the estate holds copyright, can we use the fragment? Anything that hasn't been donated to the JFK Library is clearly held by John and Patrick Hemingway (or their heirs), and I don't know enough about copyright re: ogg files. Because this is a featured article, it's been through a image review, and I don't want to add anything that infringes on copyright. If this speech is included in the NobelPrize.org site I'd feel more comfortable using it, but am not all that comfortable using copyrighted material. The Hemingway estate is very protective about their copyrights. Also, we need a secondary source explaining the circumstances of the recording. If you could get that to me, and we can clear up the copyright issue, then I'm not against adding it. Oh, btw if you end your posts with four tildes ~~~~ your sig will appear automatically. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- BTW - am copying this to the Ernest Hemingway talkpage. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Fair-use generally allows 0:30 or less, and this is 0:17. We are very much in the clear here, because we are well within fair-use guidelines, and also the entire file appears all over the Web, including the Nobel Prize site-- without attribution or copyright notice (even on mainstream sites). I think the Caedmon copyright claim is deliberately vague (and therefore weak) because some of the material had been broadcast before, and is likely in the public domain. Copyright concerns are part of my business, in my capacity as a radio producer, and as owner/manager/licensor or more than 1000 copyrighted works, so I have personal experience as a guide. On the sourcing details and corroboration, I will try to find something conclusive. I have a working relationship with Scribners (although they didn't release these recordings) --maybe they can shed light. I will say that if you are so concerned about clearance, and I don't mind that you are!, we might as well put the whole speech up instead of the fragment, once it's all kosher. re: Ernest Hemingway talkpage, I've no doubt there are some Hem-o-philes there who may know more about these recordings that Caedmon or Scribners. Seeker56 (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, that sounds fine. If we could get the entire speech, that would be great. The JFK library also has sound recordings, and if there, it would be in the public domain. I'll dig around a bit. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Fair-use generally allows 0:30 or less, and this is 0:17. We are very much in the clear here, because we are well within fair-use guidelines, and also the entire file appears all over the Web, including the Nobel Prize site-- without attribution or copyright notice (even on mainstream sites). I think the Caedmon copyright claim is deliberately vague (and therefore weak) because some of the material had been broadcast before, and is likely in the public domain. Copyright concerns are part of my business, in my capacity as a radio producer, and as owner/manager/licensor or more than 1000 copyrighted works, so I have personal experience as a guide. On the sourcing details and corroboration, I will try to find something conclusive. I have a working relationship with Scribners (although they didn't release these recordings) --maybe they can shed light. I will say that if you are so concerned about clearance, and I don't mind that you are!, we might as well put the whole speech up instead of the fragment, once it's all kosher. re: Ernest Hemingway talkpage, I've no doubt there are some Hem-o-philes there who may know more about these recordings that Caedmon or Scribners. Seeker56 (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Dickinson
Hey Truthkeeper, thanks for stepping in and providing your valuable input at Emily Dickinson. I feel like I've been manning this fort by myself for far too long, I'm going stir-crazy. First it's just me amongst the newbies, and then suddenly here are several other knowledgeable editors pitching in! Makes a gal feel not so alone in this world. Did I inadvertently trip the Bat Signal or something? María (habla conmigo) 22:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- It was on my watchlist and then was taken off my watchlist and then added again fairly recently. I was wondering if there's news re Dickinson that's bringing in the newbies, or simply students deciding to add what they've been learning. At any rate, happy to help. I'm considering, strongly, reverting the edit about the New Criiticism but I only looked at it quickly. I'm currently knee-deep in The Sun Also Rises - was planning to ping you when I'm done for feedback or even a peer review. Not there yet, though. It's not an easy book to write about. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- The user who added the New Criticism info is very... adamant, so reverting may only exacerbate. I just added some suggestions/further thoughts to the talk page, with an explicit request for someone to please fix kthnx. I've already been accused several times by this user of ownership, lack of expertise, locking the article, etc., etc. I'm trying to be a little less hands-on. It's hard to do after having watched the same damn article for three years now. Gah. Definitely ping me about Sun; it's one of two Hemingway books I actively enjoy, not including some of his short stories. I could use some levity -- and by that I mean the drinking and fishing, of course. :) María (habla conmigo) 23:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- Just finished the drinking section. Ironically the next section to tackle is the criticism section - which is hard to distill and involves a lot of reading. I've also recently expanded Indian Camp, now at GA, and intend to try to have it be the second short story at FA. Have been dipping into The Open Boat quite a bit recently. I'll keep in mind what you've said, but really, an entire section on New Criticism? Maybe I can hack it down a bit. This is the problem with working on these kinds of biographies, they have to be tended - forever. I'll spend some time bringing myself up-to-speed on the talk page. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't believe there should be an entire section, either. At all. I agree completely with Moni and you (girl power?), but New Criticism should at least be mentioned -- perhaps with a couple name-checks? No huge blockquotes, they make me nauseous. Thanks again for taking the time. The Open Boat is one of my all time favorites. It's awesome how you seem to be doing with Hemingway what I intended to do with Crane. Go you! If real life stops strangling my free time, I'd love to finish up The Red Badge of Courage. Sigh. One day... María (habla conmigo) 23:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've taken a long break from Hemingway, almost a year, but after the Ezra Pound fiasco decided it was the safest for me. Once the bio and the most important books and short stories are in place, it gets easier with each article. Anyway, I need a break, so after supper will spend some time with Emily. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- You rock. Adding the info to other articles is a great compromise, and I hope everyone else thinks so as well. Hopefully the original user will be able to help with pinpointing the particular sources used, but other than that it looks good to me. What a world we live in, in which Hemingway is a welcome respite from Pound! María (habla conmigo) 03:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- It was basically good information but in the wrong place and easily used elsewhere. Believe me, Hemingway is a very welcome respite from Pound. Although the talkpage has archived over at Pound, it shows a little of the ... well ... problems, if you should be interested. I'll keep an eye on Emily - it's well done and no reason to let it degrade. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- You rock. Adding the info to other articles is a great compromise, and I hope everyone else thinks so as well. Hopefully the original user will be able to help with pinpointing the particular sources used, but other than that it looks good to me. What a world we live in, in which Hemingway is a welcome respite from Pound! María (habla conmigo) 03:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've taken a long break from Hemingway, almost a year, but after the Ezra Pound fiasco decided it was the safest for me. Once the bio and the most important books and short stories are in place, it gets easier with each article. Anyway, I need a break, so after supper will spend some time with Emily. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't believe there should be an entire section, either. At all. I agree completely with Moni and you (girl power?), but New Criticism should at least be mentioned -- perhaps with a couple name-checks? No huge blockquotes, they make me nauseous. Thanks again for taking the time. The Open Boat is one of my all time favorites. It's awesome how you seem to be doing with Hemingway what I intended to do with Crane. Go you! If real life stops strangling my free time, I'd love to finish up The Red Badge of Courage. Sigh. One day... María (habla conmigo) 23:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- Just finished the drinking section. Ironically the next section to tackle is the criticism section - which is hard to distill and involves a lot of reading. I've also recently expanded Indian Camp, now at GA, and intend to try to have it be the second short story at FA. Have been dipping into The Open Boat quite a bit recently. I'll keep in mind what you've said, but really, an entire section on New Criticism? Maybe I can hack it down a bit. This is the problem with working on these kinds of biographies, they have to be tended - forever. I'll spend some time bringing myself up-to-speed on the talk page. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- The user who added the New Criticism info is very... adamant, so reverting may only exacerbate. I just added some suggestions/further thoughts to the talk page, with an explicit request for someone to please fix kthnx. I've already been accused several times by this user of ownership, lack of expertise, locking the article, etc., etc. I'm trying to be a little less hands-on. It's hard to do after having watched the same damn article for three years now. Gah. Definitely ping me about Sun; it's one of two Hemingway books I actively enjoy, not including some of his short stories. I could use some levity -- and by that I mean the drinking and fishing, of course. :) María (habla conmigo) 23:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Offer
If you would like me to, I can semi-protect your talk and user pages so IP addresses and newly registered users could not edit them. Sorry about the sock, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:17, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Ruhrfisch, that's nice of you to offer, but I don't think I want to limit access to my talk page because of a banned sock. I reacted badly - I'd popped in during a break when the message showed up and I thought it was from an established user telling me how to scrub the pages. Once I had a chance to think about it, I realized it was a new user and probably ILT's sock. It's ironic that they want all their pages scrubbed in the manner of the Potter pages. I don't intend to scrub all of these pages and if some of them are deleted or lose their GA status because of rewrites it's their fault for introducing the copyvio in the first place. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:30, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- OK, well if there's ever anything I can do as an admin, please let me know (or anything else I can do). I know I have not fixed the different translations in Tiggy-Winkle or done much productive lately. Hopefully I will have more free time before too long. Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's tedious work that's not very rewarding. I returned the books to the library but will get them again fairly soon for another three week stint, and go to work on another article. On a separate issue - do you know anything about the French and Indian War? I've been involved in an interesting conversation at Battle of Fort Necessity regarding nationality of militia and such, and thought that it might need more eyes. Also, thanks for the offer. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- I do not know much about the war, but I am guessing User:Kevin Myers does - not sure if he's around much lately, but he's been pretty helpful with some obscure Pennsylvania history articles of roughly that era I've worked on. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks, that's a good idea. I'll ping him when I have a chance - don't have a lot of wiki time this week. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- I do not know much about the war, but I am guessing User:Kevin Myers does - not sure if he's around much lately, but he's been pretty helpful with some obscure Pennsylvania history articles of roughly that era I've worked on. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's tedious work that's not very rewarding. I returned the books to the library but will get them again fairly soon for another three week stint, and go to work on another article. On a separate issue - do you know anything about the French and Indian War? I've been involved in an interesting conversation at Battle of Fort Necessity regarding nationality of militia and such, and thought that it might need more eyes. Also, thanks for the offer. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- OK, well if there's ever anything I can do as an admin, please let me know (or anything else I can do). I know I have not fixed the different translations in Tiggy-Winkle or done much productive lately. Hopefully I will have more free time before too long. Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
FLC of NT
Hi! I nominated List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: others) at FLC. The nomination page is here. Let's see what happens. bamse (talk) 11:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for letting me know. I'll watch it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
La Stazione review
Judging from your comment here, I can tell I offended you with my curt replies. I'm sorry about that, and I really appreciate the review you've performed on La Stazione. You've definitely helped improve the geographical context of the article, and I thank you for that. It's just that the FAC has been running for almost two months now, and none of the issues you identified feel, to my eyes, like the prose is malformed. Again, I'm sorry if I appeared cross.
--Gyrobo (talk) 02:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- No you didn't seem cross and no need to apologize. You don't agree and that's fine. The article has been there for two months which is too long in my view, but when I looked at it, I had difficulty understanding. Maybe I'm stupid. Who knows. At any rate, it's reminded me of why I'd stopped reviewing and submitting articles to FAC, which is a good reminder considering I was about to nominate an article. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- You should definitely nominate it. If you believe that you've created an article that meets the criteria, you would be doing yourself a disservice by not taking it across the threshold. I don't know what article it is, but I know it would gnaw at you. You'd spend weeks wondering what lingering issues a thorough FAC would fix, before finally nominating anyway. The absolute worst that could happen is that FAC gets archived; and even then, you've managed to improve the article somewhat. That's a good outcome. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- Could you please move your remaining issues to the bottom of your subsection on the FAC? I'm having a hard time telling what still needs to be resolved. --Gyrobo (talk) 21:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've never refactored in a FAC; it makes it hard for the delegates to follow. I've been going through and striking each evening; if it's not struck it's still outstanding. Will have another look later tonight when I have time. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- I just wanted to stop by and thank you for your extensive review. I know you ended up only voting neutral, but the points you brought up really improved the article. --Gyrobo (talk) 01:49, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've never refactored in a FAC; it makes it hard for the delegates to follow. I've been going through and striking each evening; if it's not struck it's still outstanding. Will have another look later tonight when I have time. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Could you please move your remaining issues to the bottom of your subsection on the FAC? I'm having a hard time telling what still needs to be resolved. --Gyrobo (talk) 21:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- You should definitely nominate it. If you believe that you've created an article that meets the criteria, you would be doing yourself a disservice by not taking it across the threshold. I don't know what article it is, but I know it would gnaw at you. You'd spend weeks wondering what lingering issues a thorough FAC would fix, before finally nominating anyway. The absolute worst that could happen is that FAC gets archived; and even then, you've managed to improve the article somewhat. That's a good outcome. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello
Guess what I saw yesterday? As a hint, its within 10 feet of this, this, and this. In other news, got some books, but not the big catelog I'm looking for. Also, my computer in cork has died, wont booth and needs to be replaced, with the loss of about 80-90 gigs of music i never bothered to back up. Feck. Ceoil 09:46, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Jeez, you're having a bad year, aren't you? Lose your internet and now your computer with your music. Not good news. Anyway, happy to hear you visited the woman reading - I'm very jealous. I had to take her down from the top of my page b/c the color clashed so badly with the blue semi-retired banner it made my eyes hurt. Good to year from you btw .... good luck getting yourself back online and enjoy London. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I got bits snd pitches on MM, but more excited by what I found on Ingres and by far his works I saw were the most impressive in the flesh. Still no sign of Cambell's big book, maybe just as well considering the price. Ceoil 02:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Sounds as though the money is better spent getting your computer fixed and retrieving your music. Expensive hobby, isn't this? Books, trips, computers .... Re booksellers, a lot of them have given up brick & mortar stores and gone online to umbrella sites like AbeBooks. I suspect that's where you'll find the book, but maybe you don't need it after all. Just realized I've seen this - wondered why it seemed so familiar. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:19, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the help on Scott and do not worry about the edit conflict (my own fault for not previewing). I have semi-protected the article so I can do things off line. Glad to see you are not semi-retired; if my life ever gets less crazy I swear I will finsih the cleanup of Mrs TW. ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the flower - all the daffodils have frozen because of the cold spell, so it's nice to see a bit of spring. I hadn't realized the Scott article is one of yours; it's very well done. I have a nice early edition of the Scott's Last Expedition that has a facsimile of his final journal entry ( I can scan it if you'd like to have it). To me it represents the strength of the human spirit and underscores how important writing is, even in the face of death. As for semi-retired, had a serious crisis of confidence writing-wise and thought maybe I should stop. But, quickly changed my mind. I think Mrs. Tiggy-winkle is in pretty good shape. When I get through my Hemingway phase and my current fac, I'll start one of the other Potter pages. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:41, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, but the Scott article is by Brianboulton. I have made maps for some of his polar exploration articles (and he kindly made me a co-nom on one FAC for maps) but the credit there is all his - I just watch it (and it gets a lot of vandalism and good faith attempts to "improve" it). Our crocuses froze but today I saw our glory of the snow had bloomed - Spring cannot be stopped! More later, take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Don't take it personally
You're not the first to be accused on that talk page of having a hidden agenda. I suspect you won't be the last, either. Parrot of Doom 21:41, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
What PoD said. These warriors disappear just as quickly as they appear, they're nothing to get bothered about. Malleus Fatuorum 21:45, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- No, I'm not bothered, but thought it was time to leave before I say something I regret. I hate the new pictures in the page btw - they have nothing to do with the text. And also, as an American, when I lived in England, it was interesting and confusing to learn about Guy Fawkes night. It's not as though that's the easiest bit of history to understand, and I really like what PoD is doing with these pages. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- I think, like PoD, I became rather fascinated by 17th and 18th-century English history, it was such a strange time. This is just a personal opinion, but I think many of wikipedia's problems can be traced back to the Puritans who landed in America then, and the attitudes that they instilled. Those of us who stayed behind probably thought "good riddance". Malleus Fatuorum 22:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately one of my ancestors was on one of those boats. It's not the original puritans who landed in Plymouth - it's the current puritanical attitude that so many here seem to think is so very correct. Personally I think we're going into another one of those strange times - it's actually pretty sickening. And yes, it is reflected in wikipedia's problems. Anyway, time for supper over here. Truthkeeper88 (talk)
- It's interesting to compare the attitudes of Australians, or even those from places like Illinois, which didn't suffer so much the Puritan nonsense. America is a big place, with many cultural influences. Malleus Fatuorum 22:26, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- I hope you learnt something from the article, I certainly did. Until I started reading Cressy's work I had little knowledge of the anti-popery nonsense, or the rioting, etc. I thought it was just a night of revelry that had somehow managed to survive for 400 years. When you think about 5 November, it's a wonder it's still celebrated. IIRC the article received several hundred thousand views last 5 November, that's at least a few tens of thousands of people who now know a bit more about history. I wonder how many of them looked at the article to see who celebrates it in South Africa? Parrot of Doom 23:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- The thing is, I don't think people understand fully the impact of the religious split at that period. Malleus' comment above is relevant in that in Boston, the Puritan bastion, Catholics were never treated well - though the large influx of Irish to Boston diffused a lot of Protestantism. Also, Guy Fawkes is really not well known outside of England, and the Gunpowder Plot a blip in history to most readers. That it has survived 400 years is significant, but is significant because some of that religious tension still lurks below the surface, I think. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- And not very far below the surface as anyone who's witnessed an Orange march through Glasgow for instance would know, or a Celtic vs. Rangers football match. Malleus Fatuorum 00:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- There's a Glaswegian author I follow whose books I like. They're set in the sixties and seventies, and it's interesting to me to read about the social split based on Protestantism and Catholicism in Glasgow. I think it's important to have articles like the Guy Fawkes page to explain the history - that people burn effigies without knowing why, and try to trivialize the subject, and undermine the historical reasons for the burnings, is beyond me. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- And not very far below the surface as anyone who's witnessed an Orange march through Glasgow for instance would know, or a Celtic vs. Rangers football match. Malleus Fatuorum 00:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- The thing is, I don't think people understand fully the impact of the religious split at that period. Malleus' comment above is relevant in that in Boston, the Puritan bastion, Catholics were never treated well - though the large influx of Irish to Boston diffused a lot of Protestantism. Also, Guy Fawkes is really not well known outside of England, and the Gunpowder Plot a blip in history to most readers. That it has survived 400 years is significant, but is significant because some of that religious tension still lurks below the surface, I think. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- I hope you learnt something from the article, I certainly did. Until I started reading Cressy's work I had little knowledge of the anti-popery nonsense, or the rioting, etc. I thought it was just a night of revelry that had somehow managed to survive for 400 years. When you think about 5 November, it's a wonder it's still celebrated. IIRC the article received several hundred thousand views last 5 November, that's at least a few tens of thousands of people who now know a bit more about history. I wonder how many of them looked at the article to see who celebrates it in South Africa? Parrot of Doom 23:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, 60k hits - well done both! Johnbod (talk) 14:28, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Johnbod - I didn't do anything but move around a bit of text when I realized it was on the main page - and then keep an eye on it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Take your praIse when ever you get in TK! None of this 'I only...' Ceoil 14:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- That's something any wiki friend would do for another - knowing you didn't have a computer and internet access, I fixed a bit. Not a big deal at all. But I'll take the praise. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Vagueness
It is not my goal to argue with reviewers. When you brought up a point that I disagreed with, I attempted to explain why it was either incorrect or inactionable. It is not the prerogative of nominators to blindly make whatever changes reviewers ask. Pointing to specific parts of the article you take issue with, and working together to resolve those issues, are constructive; telling me that you just don't like it, and that I need to seek outside review and familiarize myself with an unspecified policy, is not. I don't know what change(s) you refer to in my previous FAC, that you claim I did purely to avoid it becoming archived, and I also take issue with your implication that I willingly ignored any of Finetooth's comments. I have no issue with reviewers being thorough, I have a problem with vagueness. There is absolutely no way that my editing will improve if I have no idea what you're talking about. --Gyrobo (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- It should be pretty clear when four reviewers tell you that a certain point is not necessary and two or more editors change the page only to have you revert. Anyway, this doesn't seem to be going anywhere, but I will tell you that in the first three sentences of the new FAC I see two errors. I've scanned the entire page and see problems throughout. I've read your A-class review and agree with Daniel Case's points; I've read the PR and agree with Finetooth's points. So three editors see problems. We are trying to help, not hinder. Anyway, I'll recuse myself from the review. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- To the best of my knowledge, I resolved the issues that both Daniel Case and Finetooth brought up. That's why I nominated the article. And again, I don't know what issue on the previous FAC you're talking about, nor am I aware of what two errors exist in the first three sentences of the article. I'm not trying to be adversarial here, I have been nominating FACs for about six months and have always tried to maintain cordiality with reviewers. And at this point, I respectfully insist that you don't recuse, that you complete a substantive review; the comments you've made have already planted a seed of doubt for future reviewers, implying that the prose is problematic and that I have problems receiving criticism. I find that grossly unfair. --Gyrobo (talk) 21:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting that you don't know what issues were brought up at the previous FAC but then changed per WP:SNOW. FAC is not a vote; it's a place to determine whether the article fulfills the FA criteria as nominated - not a place to work out issues along the way. At any rate, there's much about wikipedia that's not fair. I haven't the time for a full review and insisting is well ... I don't know how to put it so will let it be. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- You brought up many issues on the FAC which I found inactionable, but I believe I now know which issue in particular you are describing. I stated in the FAC that while I disagreed with the decision to remove the content in question, it had been brought up often enough that consensus was clearly against my viewpoint. The implication that I changed my opinion for the sole purpose of passing this article, rather than as an acknowledgement of consensus, was yours. Regarding your belief that the FAC process is ideally pass/fail, determined solely by the state of the article at the time of its nomination: this is not what I have observed. If you have specific examples of areas where Wallkill Valley Rail Trail does not comply with the MoS, dismissing me with a casual, "life isn't fair and I wasn't happy about what you said", doesn't resolve those issues. If you truly have no interest in helping me improve this article, then I ask only that you not ascribe motivations to me. Have a good one. --Gyrobo (talk) 23:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- I listed issued that you decided were not actionable. Had they been fixed, I probably would have moved to a support. As for articles being promoted based on their readiness when they are nominated, I suggest you have a look at Fantastic Adventures that received four supports within days, though it did sit for a while before getting reviewers, and Tom Driberg that went through in about a week. These are only two recent examples. Re your nomination - I strongly think you need to be familiar enough with MoS to detect glaring errors. You have an error in the second or third sentence - can't remember which, sorry. And yes, I can say wikipedia isn't fair because basically it's not. I'd be more than happy to help - but don't want to spend time being told that my suggestions are rubbish and have helpful edits reverted. That's a timesink in my view. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- You brought up many issues on the FAC which I found inactionable, but I believe I now know which issue in particular you are describing. I stated in the FAC that while I disagreed with the decision to remove the content in question, it had been brought up often enough that consensus was clearly against my viewpoint. The implication that I changed my opinion for the sole purpose of passing this article, rather than as an acknowledgement of consensus, was yours. Regarding your belief that the FAC process is ideally pass/fail, determined solely by the state of the article at the time of its nomination: this is not what I have observed. If you have specific examples of areas where Wallkill Valley Rail Trail does not comply with the MoS, dismissing me with a casual, "life isn't fair and I wasn't happy about what you said", doesn't resolve those issues. If you truly have no interest in helping me improve this article, then I ask only that you not ascribe motivations to me. Have a good one. --Gyrobo (talk) 23:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Peer review help
I checked and it is now listed at WP:PR - it takes the bot some time to list new PRs, so I imagine it was just that. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:05, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- I saw it on the list but something's wrong with the talkpage. Shouldn't there be a link to the PR? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:22, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up - I had not checked the talk page. For some reason the PR archive number was wrong (2 instead of 1) which meant there was no PR to link to (since the current PR is archive=1). By the way, I have started reading the Hemingway article at FAC and should comment on it there in a day or two at most. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing - haven't a clue how I managed to do that. Also thanks for taking the time to read True at First Light. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up - I had not checked the talk page. For some reason the PR archive number was wrong (2 instead of 1) which meant there was no PR to link to (since the current PR is archive=1). By the way, I have started reading the Hemingway article at FAC and should comment on it there in a day or two at most. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey. The license currently used is clearly bogus, so I've nominated it for deletion at Commons. That's a slow process, but someone may be able to find a solid claim of it being public domain; something from that era has a chance. In the mean time, it's best to keep it off the article, as it wouldn't (or shouldn't) pass GAC or FAC with it on. J Milburn (talk) 10:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I highly doubt it's in the public domain based on the link from NARA and the publication date of the book. I did search the JFK Library for the image, because they're good about displaying the ones that are in the public domain, but couldn't find it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Hemingway 1953-1954 safari.png
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/Copyright-problem.svg/64px-Copyright-problem.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Hemingway 1953-1954 safari.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 04:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- I added a bit more information to the article description page, but there was already a link to the JFK Library page for the photo where it says it is in the Public Domain. I removed the speedy delete tag. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:14, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing that. I kind of gulped when you suggested the other images because I get tagged so often for images that I upload. The problem is that we don't have license template that covers these images. I do really like having the images in the article though. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Re: True at First Light
Cool, I'll drop in soon, maybe tomorrow. I'm around quite a bit lately, so you caught me at a good time. The Red Badge of Courage is finally at GAC and I hope to have it at FAC within the month. Someone got a bee in my bonnet and I've been thrashing around to rid myself of it ever since. :) María (habla conmigo) 20:46, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
- You're a much faster worker than I am, and I seem to be losing interest here, but want to finish up some of the pages I have on the go before thinking about a break. Anyway, thanks for looking at Hemingway. The Sun Also Rises, currently at peer review, will be up next, but that has me worried because there are soo many sources. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
- Sigh, tell me about it. I've had to pick and choose with Crane sources, but it's easier when they're all saying pretty much the same thing. It's not like there's one crazy critic out there saying Fleming's battle with er, battles, is analogous to Crane's battle with his latent homosexuality or anything. (Now THAT would be an interesting article.) Don't lose hope! I'll get back to you soon. María (habla conmigo) 22:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Hemingway Paris apartment 1924.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hemingway Paris apartment 1924.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Eeekster (talk) 22:16, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations
Just saw that True at First Light now has its well deserved FA star and wanted to congratulate you on a job well done. Keep up the great work, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
- I was going to post a thank you note on your page this morning but you've beaten me to it. Thanks so much for the good review - I'm very pleased because the article is much better than it was when I submitted it, so it's been a successful review. Also, gave me a much needed boost of confidence. Thanks also for picking up The Sun Also Rises for PR. It's a much more important book and the page isn't finished but needs another set eyes at this point. Take your time - because of my schedule I don't intend to nominate it until after the middle of May. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yay! Congratulations from me as well. Very well done. María (habla conmigo) 16:32, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm trying to carve out some time to review The Red Badge of Courage for you but am a bit stacked up at the moment. Hopefully tonight or tomorrow. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:06, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
- Aw, thanks! I'd appreciate it, but no worries if you're too busy. I'm working my tail off to finish a couple IRL projects, so I really shouldn't even be thinking about Red Badge at the moment. Dammit, now I'm thinking about it... María (habla conmigo) 21:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on the successful FAC! I actually took it off my watchlist recently, and am beginning to regret it. I am going to put it back on! Sadads (talk) 17:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
MM
- And congrats from me too, missed all the excitment! Ceoil 19:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Nice to see you back. MM looks good with the changes - I wasn't sure how it would look once copied over, and was a little angsty about messing with the images but I seem to have managed it okay. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah much better now, less congested, flows better. Great to be back, in a way, in a way not. I've a lot to finishe and a lot I want to do here, well see how it goes. Ceoil 20:14, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well for whatever it's worth, I always think I'm leaving, but not until I finish the next article, and the next, and the next ... Anyway, you seem to have attracted attention to Olivia. I hadn't realized the entire lead had been rewritten. Thanks for the tweaks, btw. As soon as I get time, I'll read MM now that I don't have to switch back & forth between two pages. Was going on pure intuition on that. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah much better now, less congested, flows better. Great to be back, in a way, in a way not. I've a lot to finishe and a lot I want to do here, well see how it goes. Ceoil 20:14, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Nice to see you back. MM looks good with the changes - I wasn't sure how it would look once copied over, and was a little angsty about messing with the images but I seem to have managed it okay. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- And it worked a treat. I came into a small amount of money while I was away, and ordered a bunch of art books finally, will soon have Cambells big NG book, and a few others on early Netherlandish art, Ingres and Goya, after a long wait. It'll be good to get back into longish articles after a year of poverty and stubs. Bty, what happened to the edit functions, I'm having to type the four tides manually, and have no handy wiki mark up to click on. Ceoil 22:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Something happened - a long time ago. I remember having to do something in preferences - 'show edit toolbar' maybe? And don't forget to do whatever you have to do reset it all. But on my browser the edit window toolbar is there sometimes, sometimes not. I've been doing a lot manually or by using the markup below the edit summary box. Btw - created a page for Georgie Hyde-Lees and didn't realize until it was too late Yeats called her George. Do you think it needs a page move? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:12, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- No, I always though George was a bit unkind. The article is perfectly nice and lovely as it is. Ceoil 22:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- And congrats from me too, missed all the excitment! Ceoil 19:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
I think I told you this on your talkpage, but after this weekend won't be around much or at all until after the middle of May. I thought I'd work on tidying refs and MoS and all the little things that need to be done on MM b/c won't get to it until later. The structure is good now, I think, and I'll leave the prose to you. Just so you know. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Olivia & Yeats
- Yes, I think George is unkind too. It's stubby still, but we have Modernist to thank for planting the idea. A few days ago I got a book from the library about Yeats & Georgie so will add to it - though not sure when. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- When it takes your fancy I suppose....no urgency about these things is there. The work your doing is just great, I'm finding its when you step out you realise how good some guys and gals here are. And how useless and misguided some others are. Makes me want to write a uncivil, pointed punk song using bothe the F and C words. Ceoil 22:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- You don't need to step out to realise that. Glad you're back and still making me laugh. Write a song about wp and post it on your page - very good idea. As for the work, it comes in fits and starts - a little here and a little there and suddenly (or not suddenly) a few pages are good enough to be reviewed. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think I'm prob further along the cycle of the life span of wiki editors than you, but its great to watch your output. I'm having great fun going through Olivia, such pathos, such longing and waste. Ceoil 23:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'm having fun watching you go through. Between and you and Malleus the prose is much better. I want to start a page on The Wind in the Reeds and write about the poems Yeats wrote during this period. Any time to help by chance? With all the new art books and all, sounds as though you've planned out the rest of your wiki life. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- How many favours do I owe you by now, pages youve helped me with; I suppose given I'm not averse to Yeats I might help....Ceoil 00:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- It's very much a long-term project. I have to read the poems and read more about Maud & try to understand Yeats a bit more. So, months away - maybe. But, I think, worth trying. Wouldn't want force you though .... Btw, thanks so much for the copyedits. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- How many favours do I owe you by now, pages youve helped me with; I suppose given I'm not averse to Yeats I might help....Ceoil 00:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'm having fun watching you go through. Between and you and Malleus the prose is much better. I want to start a page on The Wind in the Reeds and write about the poems Yeats wrote during this period. Any time to help by chance? With all the new art books and all, sounds as though you've planned out the rest of your wiki life. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think I'm prob further along the cycle of the life span of wiki editors than you, but its great to watch your output. I'm having great fun going through Olivia, such pathos, such longing and waste. Ceoil 23:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- And thank you dear for the fixes to the copy edit. I cant really comment on the fac as we are friends, but I found it touching and poignant, to an almost unbearable degree at times. I knew that Yeats was a bollix from other angles, but jesus christ. 00:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- I know you can't comment on the fac, but nice to have you along for the ride - this was your idea. Do you remember, last summer in August saying we should do a page on Olivia? And I've always been a bit guilty about going on it and not waiting, so it's good to have you here now. As I was writing about Georgie the other night I had to shake my head at Yeats and wonder about him and women. But then I realized they were all like that: Yeats, Pound, Hemingway. Their art got in the way of their relationships, which is okay given the quality of their art. I do admire Olivia putting up with her husband, Yeats, Pound, Dorothy ... Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- You don't need to step out to realise that. Glad you're back and still making me laugh. Write a song about wp and post it on your page - very good idea. As for the work, it comes in fits and starts - a little here and a little there and suddenly (or not suddenly) a few pages are good enough to be reviewed. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- When it takes your fancy I suppose....no urgency about these things is there. The work your doing is just great, I'm finding its when you step out you realise how good some guys and gals here are. And how useless and misguided some others are. Makes me want to write a uncivil, pointed punk song using bothe the F and C words. Ceoil 22:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I think George is unkind too. It's stubby still, but we have Modernist to thank for planting the idea. A few days ago I got a book from the library about Yeats & Georgie so will add to it - though not sure when. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think a lot of it was narcissism, and not committing to anyone unperfect in a gothic romantic way, or too unatainable in a social/political way. Either/ or not very nice for the women, and poor Iseult. I'm very gald you wrote these articles, and articulated a feeling I thought I shared alone. Ceoil 01:08, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Olivia's biographer has written two fiction books, The Ghostwriter and The Seance, which seem to be based on these women, though he begins in the present and works the narrative back. I haven't had time to read them but my sense is he understand too. Poor Iseult is right - her page needs sprucing up a bit. I'm very glad you suggested writing these articles. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- You might have noticed I tried and failed/gave up on the Iseult page. She married a right bastard, and rightly slipped out of public view from her early 20s, which was respected by the press and worked out ok. I'm troubled by the yeats page though, a lot of his gravitas is taken from his position on the seanad, and given Ireland's woe these these days there are moves to abolish that second house along with revelations that he was only given the position to shut him up and pass him off as a fatten anglo calf. Ceoil 01:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The Yeats page does need work - not sure if it's best to work on a page about the his poems first or to go directly to his bio. I can help a little; have three bios I got from the library a few days ago and his memoirs, but the thought of tackling a big bio reminds me uncomfortably of last summer. Let's get MM finished first & then decide what to do about Yeats. He'll wait. And you have the Netherlandish art to work on. And Goya. And btw - are you now back in the 21st century w/ computer, internet, email? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Re yeats - a little of both, but the bio first. There is a lot of rivisionalism to happen yet, not least how someone so aestic could be still so erotic, and still so chaste. The times, but not even hinted on the page. I have computer and internet, eircom address is long gone, since I switched ISPs. Tryingh to find an alternative with a good handy client, none yet. Ceoil 02:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, it's an interesting combination. The bio first, I guess. So explain this to me - I ask whether you want to help with a new page and now we're discussing the bio instead, hmmm. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Re yeats - a little of both, but the bio first. There is a lot of rivisionalism to happen yet, not least how someone so aestic could be still so erotic, and still so chaste. The times, but not even hinted on the page. I have computer and internet, eircom address is long gone, since I switched ISPs. Tryingh to find an alternative with a good handy client, none yet. Ceoil 02:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The Yeats page does need work - not sure if it's best to work on a page about the his poems first or to go directly to his bio. I can help a little; have three bios I got from the library a few days ago and his memoirs, but the thought of tackling a big bio reminds me uncomfortably of last summer. Let's get MM finished first & then decide what to do about Yeats. He'll wait. And you have the Netherlandish art to work on. And Goya. And btw - are you now back in the 21st century w/ computer, internet, email? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- You might have noticed I tried and failed/gave up on the Iseult page. She married a right bastard, and rightly slipped out of public view from her early 20s, which was respected by the press and worked out ok. I'm troubled by the yeats page though, a lot of his gravitas is taken from his position on the seanad, and given Ireland's woe these these days there are moves to abolish that second house along with revelations that he was only given the position to shut him up and pass him off as a fatten anglo calf. Ceoil 01:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Olivia's biographer has written two fiction books, The Ghostwriter and The Seance, which seem to be based on these women, though he begins in the present and works the narrative back. I haven't had time to read them but my sense is he understand too. Poor Iseult is right - her page needs sprucing up a bit. I'm very glad you suggested writing these articles. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Re:Favor again
I've offered a thorough image review- it's gonna take a little bit of fiddling, but it's a lot better than it was! Keep up the good work. J Milburn (talk) 11:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
The Sun Also Rises PR
My comments are done - hope they help, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- They're very helpful. Some of the spots I knew were rough, but it's always good to have another opinion. You also found much that I'd missed, which is good. Will keep me busy on this very cold and rainy weekend. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Glad to help - drop me a line on my talk page when you want me to look at it again, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Will do. I'm about to run into a serious time crunch and will be out for a while, so will as much as I can this weekend and then let it sit until I get back. I need to think about how to handle a few of the points, so I don't think I'll be completely done until about a month from now. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Invite
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/Vincent_Willem_van_Gogh_138.jpg/220px-Vincent_Willem_van_Gogh_138.jpg)
Myself Riggr and Modernist are going for a few drinks and ice-cream on JNW'S talk later on if you'd like to join us. I'm not sure if JNW himself will be around, but it'll be fun. He said we could drop in anytime, long as we didn't break nothing. There will be a chair there for you anyway. Ceoil 18:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Oh how nice! Thanks, I'll drop by. I'll get shy with all you VA & music people - so might sit quietly in my chair and watch. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:06, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Its casual dress, so no fancier than this. Ceoil 19:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, chair's too small for those dresses. I'll check my closet to see what I have for rags lying around - should have something suitable, but you should know that normally I'm a jeans and boots kind of person. Oh, and time? Since I have to prepare, you know. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Later on, don't worry about it. I'll call you. sorry for sounding like a right bastard, I'm just trying to impress my male friends, who luckly are too old and blind to read text this size. Around midnight my time ok ? Ceoil 20:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- ok, but will have to be fashionably late .... Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Har, now your talking. I wont mention you specifically I'll just say, a myserious woman will join us. In other news, this is just lovely...[1] Ceoil 21:12, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- ... got lost listening to the tune and forgot to thank you ... later Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Har, now your talking. I wont mention you specifically I'll just say, a myserious woman will join us. In other news, this is just lovely...[1] Ceoil 21:12, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- ok, but will have to be fashionably late .... Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Later on, don't worry about it. I'll call you. sorry for sounding like a right bastard, I'm just trying to impress my male friends, who luckly are too old and blind to read text this size. Around midnight my time ok ? Ceoil 20:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, chair's too small for those dresses. I'll check my closet to see what I have for rags lying around - should have something suitable, but you should know that normally I'm a jeans and boots kind of person. Oh, and time? Since I have to prepare, you know. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Its casual dress, so no fancier than this. Ceoil 19:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Concidence....or great minds think alike....can you give me a hand with this edit[2]. I dont know the novel, and the source (is on google books) is a bit long winded so I'm not sure i got the point. Great cross over though. Ceoil 23:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting cross over. I'll have a look at the source, but what you've written makes sense for Hemingway. On my way over to JNW's house. Dunno, have to think about this, and a page is missing so it's difficult. Good book for me to use in the SAR article though.... Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The thing on JNW's may be a long party, its dependant on Riggr turning up; he usually arrives around midnight my time, which seems to be the curfew time in the antartic-or whereever he lives-for hunting baby seals and small deer. Which is fine, havn't done a 3 day party since colledge, and that wasn't yesterday or the day before! Happy days --suuucks....have a toke Ceoil 23:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Re the source, yeah I need to think about it too. Its very obtuse in what I can view, I think I know what he is getting at, but he never actually says it. Annoying in a way. Ceoil 23:58, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- I know exactly what he's saying, but I think there are better critics who are more clear. What he means is the landscape you paint/ write about / in your mind is not the landscape represented. It's an amalgam of landscapes and each person perceives the same landscape differently. Hemingway presents landscapes in SAR from different points of view to show that each character sees differently & the whole is represented by the parts, if that makes any sense. Also, look at the Goya on the Sun Also Rises page - the blank spaces represent something and each person projects what should be there, but we all know it's some sort of a bull ring, and a crowd watching. Anyway, I prob. have an essay about this in my many books of essays. Here's the essay you need. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Re the source, yeah I need to think about it too. Its very obtuse in what I can view, I think I know what he is getting at, but he never actually says it. Annoying in a way. Ceoil 23:58, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The thing on JNW's may be a long party, its dependant on Riggr turning up; he usually arrives around midnight my time, which seems to be the curfew time in the antartic-or whereever he lives-for hunting baby seals and small deer. Which is fine, havn't done a 3 day party since colledge, and that wasn't yesterday or the day before! Happy days --suuucks....have a toke Ceoil 23:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, have you seen Unfortunate events in the front seats of the ring of Madrid, and the death of the Mayor of Torrejón, where almost 3/4's of the canvas is blank, or the void that is The Dog . Goya started many of his late canvases with black and etched into them with greys and whites. Bacon often cut chunks out of the painted surface with a knife to show the black bare underneeth. Its all part of the same thing. Ceoil 00:36, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, but hard to write about. I like the Tauromaquia series, a lot. Hemingway was very impressed with it. BTW - he became interested in the Cezannes at Gertrude Stein's. She had I don't know how many. Modernist might know. I'll send the jstor essay on if you want it & if I know where to send. It might be better written. I suppose I should download it and read, and incorporate some of this into The Sun Also Rises. Sigh - that page is endless. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:47, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The old email adress is prob lost to me, passwords gone and all, so hold off sending anything until I can recover from my old hard drive or I settle on a new address. The likelyhood is I'll be asking you to resend a lot of the pdf's you gave me in the last year. <sigh and apologies> Ceoil 01:01, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Did you lose gmail too? Um, re resending - could be a problem, maybe, possibly. Anyway, I'll download it and save it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'm very slow to give up on the eircom address, have had it since the internet began, and still have all these visions of ex-girlfriends emailing me about how I was so right all along and how they were so wrong, and lost out on so much. Yeah sad but like I'm male, like. Re your endless edit summary; [3], listened to before [4]. Ceoil 01:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I understand not wanting to give up an email address. I have one that I've had since the internet began; only get spam there now but still keep it anyway. Was only curious about gmail. Anyway, I'll wait to send anything, but you'll prob have to wait until the end of May for resending. I'm not sure I can resend everything - will have to look at what I have.
Haven't gotten to the tunes. Beautiful tune - the first one. Not crazy about the remaster after hearing them in succession. I'm staring at your Cezanne & thinking about how to reword it. Might be time to give up for the night. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:52, 23 April 2011 (UTC) - You're in luck - I checked & still have all the files I sent. Phew. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:31, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- O thats great because there are a few on Gauguin that I really like but havent used yet. I dont know what it is with me and artisted called paul ;) Tks. Ceoil 08:17, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Those are all organized, nicely put away in a folder - found them them last night. It's the van der Weyden ones that worried me, but it looks as though I have most of them. Re the edit summary on MM about not remembering the source for the sideboard - it's not in anything I sent b/c I don't remember reading it, which eliminates some sources, if that's any help. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- O thats great because there are a few on Gauguin that I really like but havent used yet. I dont know what it is with me and artisted called paul ;) Tks. Ceoil 08:17, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I understand not wanting to give up an email address. I have one that I've had since the internet began; only get spam there now but still keep it anyway. Was only curious about gmail. Anyway, I'll wait to send anything, but you'll prob have to wait until the end of May for resending. I'm not sure I can resend everything - will have to look at what I have.
- I'm very slow to give up on the eircom address, have had it since the internet began, and still have all these visions of ex-girlfriends emailing me about how I was so right all along and how they were so wrong, and lost out on so much. Yeah sad but like I'm male, like. Re your endless edit summary; [3], listened to before [4]. Ceoil 01:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thats great news that you have them. I remember now where the bit about the side board came from, so dont worry. Olivia is loking great bty, v proud for you. Ceoil 12:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Was just reading about your pets - I half-tamed a feral cat who had kittens on my porch & I kept two of them. They are half feral - won't let anyone touch them, but follow me around, everywhere. The mother was well and truly crazy so had to be allowed to go on her way. Sad when pets die, isn't it? Thanks for tweaking SAR & yes Olivia looks good. Needs a few more reviews though. Oops, sorry I mentioned cats. Am getting caught up. You've been busy. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I might have told you before but the feral cat I trained was one.tough.lady. When she was about a year old she had her first litter, and late that night I put her in a box in the hotpress. Next morning my mother found out, freaked and threw box, kittens and all, out the door. The mother cat, walked calmly out of the house, picked each one up by the neck with her mouth and carried them back inside, walking between my mother's legs, her standing at the doorway with the floowbrush going sssshhhhooooosssss, out out out out. One by one. Thats a though cat. We were all highly impressed with the mother cat's determination and sheer balls, and three generations later, they are still at my parents house. Two tough women, but I think they respected each other in an uneasy 14 year alliance. Ceoil 13:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- My cats' mother plopped herself into a box we kept for her on the back porch during a thunderstorm and suddenly there was box of full of kittens. I'd been trying to tame her, and believing she was quite occupied at the moment, picked up box, mama cat & kittens and brought it into the cellar. That night it got very cold and snowed, so I'm not sure the kittens would have survived outside. I had seven cats (mother # kittens) in my basement for two months & was quite impressed with myself. The mama was not at all impressed with being brought into a house & tried to scratch her way out. Had to let her go. But she was smart enough to have her kittens on the backporch of a softhearted woman. Couldn't let the kittens die - it's just one of those things. Btw - will download and read the pdf re Cezanne, EH, & the Sun a bit later. I need to read it and prob add to the Sun page. If anything useful for you, I'll add to the Melting Snow. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:30, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I might have told you before but the feral cat I trained was one.tough.lady. When she was about a year old she had her first litter, and late that night I put her in a box in the hotpress. Next morning my mother found out, freaked and threw box, kittens and all, out the door. The mother cat, walked calmly out of the house, picked each one up by the neck with her mouth and carried them back inside, walking between my mother's legs, her standing at the doorway with the floowbrush going sssshhhhooooosssss, out out out out. One by one. Thats a though cat. We were all highly impressed with the mother cat's determination and sheer balls, and three generations later, they are still at my parents house. Two tough women, but I think they respected each other in an uneasy 14 year alliance. Ceoil 13:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Was just reading about your pets - I half-tamed a feral cat who had kittens on my porch & I kept two of them. They are half feral - won't let anyone touch them, but follow me around, everywhere. The mother was well and truly crazy so had to be allowed to go on her way. Sad when pets die, isn't it? Thanks for tweaking SAR & yes Olivia looks good. Needs a few more reviews though. Oops, sorry I mentioned cats. Am getting caught up. You've been busy. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Did you lose gmail too? Um, re resending - could be a problem, maybe, possibly. Anyway, I'll download it and save it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The old email adress is prob lost to me, passwords gone and all, so hold off sending anything until I can recover from my old hard drive or I settle on a new address. The likelyhood is I'll be asking you to resend a lot of the pdf's you gave me in the last year. <sigh and apologies> Ceoil 01:01, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, but hard to write about. I like the Tauromaquia series, a lot. Hemingway was very impressed with it. BTW - he became interested in the Cezannes at Gertrude Stein's. She had I don't know how many. Modernist might know. I'll send the jstor essay on if you want it & if I know where to send. It might be better written. I suppose I should download it and read, and incorporate some of this into The Sun Also Rises. Sigh - that page is endless. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:47, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I spy on the SAR page a Goya article that needs writing. But not today, off for food with friends later. How long will you be gone for, it seems ironic that I arrive back as you are leaving. Oh and my edit box with the tides and stuff just magically reappeared. The Gods work in mysterious ways. Ceoil 13:44, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, there is an article that needs writing for that Goya print - as I said, endless. I really like that print - took me forever to find it, but Hemingway was influenced by Goya's art & tried to do in writing what Goya did in those prints. The Pedro Romero portrait is very nice too. After Wednesday slammed with work for about ten days, but will be checking here sporadically. Then traveling until May 20ish - am planning to go entirely offline at that time. Oh, and happy Easter too. I'm off later for errands - so if you're not here tomorrow - prob late next month. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:55, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Slainte, have fun and May the 20ish it is so. Ceoil 14:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I still have to see Olivia through & finish SAR, so only partially gone for the next two weeks. Just out of curiosity, what are your plans for MM? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'll have the NG book in about 2 weeks. A week integrating, a week touching up, and then FAC. Witches Sabbath after than; I know its disjointed, but all the info is there, and lord god was it hard to come by. So some spruching should sort it out. Meanwhile, I want to build up the two articles I have on Gauguin, both have potential for a good read, and a full of drama, if I can draw them out. Ceoil 14:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- So I should be back in time for the excitement on MM - that's good. Seem to be a little invested in her. Let me know, before I leave, if you want Paul's files resent for Oviri & the jug. I think Witches Sabbath is quite good btw. Truthkeeper88 (talk)
- I'll have the NG book in about 2 weeks. A week integrating, a week touching up, and then FAC. Witches Sabbath after than; I know its disjointed, but all the info is there, and lord god was it hard to come by. So some spruching should sort it out. Meanwhile, I want to build up the two articles I have on Gauguin, both have potential for a good read, and a full of drama, if I can draw them out. Ceoil 14:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I still have to see Olivia through & finish SAR, so only partially gone for the next two weeks. Just out of curiosity, what are your plans for MM? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Slainte, have fun and May the 20ish it is so. Ceoil 14:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, there is an article that needs writing for that Goya print - as I said, endless. I really like that print - took me forever to find it, but Hemingway was influenced by Goya's art & tried to do in writing what Goya did in those prints. The Pedro Romero portrait is very nice too. After Wednesday slammed with work for about ten days, but will be checking here sporadically. Then traveling until May 20ish - am planning to go entirely offline at that time. Oh, and happy Easter too. I'm off later for errands - so if you're not here tomorrow - prob late next month. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:55, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
TK on Twitter
I just stumbled across the fact that someone is posting links to my talkpage on Twitter - I don't know whether this happens frequently, but also don't know that it's necessary. Anyway, unfortunately I'll be keeping personal info such as travel plans, etc. off this page in the future. My email is always available too. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)