Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:11, 22 December 2007

File:Animalibrí.gif

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)

300

I thought you'd break 300, and so you have! Congratulations. Maybe you'd best act as amicus curiae in some Arbitation Committee fact-finding over the coming year, and develop a track-record there as a consistent observer. All the diffs are laid out publicly for any thoughtful outsider to comment upon. --Wetman (talk) 08:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, as I found out to my cost that approach seems to upset those intent on muddying the water and producing convoluted threads and screaming "Troll" and "Attack". It was however a method I had intended to use. 300 it's not bad is it? I must be doing something right. Giano (talk) 09:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Command me oh Leonidas! Wetman has a good idea there...with all the valuable experience you've had with the committee plus all your support, you should be appointed an Honorary Arb. They already allow Arbitrator Emeritus, so why not?!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 19:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

No, I am an all or nothing sort of person, no half measures or appeasement, the final voters though do seem a little misinformed - odd that isn't it both so close together, and both failing the old Wiki proverb of "check your sources!" makes one wonder who the source is. Giano (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Well then, it isn't just me who found that a bit odd. Really, if they don't want you there they could just sign the "oppose" list, without coming up with convoluted and in some cases quite strange reasoning. Sort of makes one wonder, doesn't it. None of that is particularly relevant, though. The fact that 300 people have put their name forward in support of your candidacy shows that you're onto something here. Risker (talk) 19:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry, if half the things said about me here were true, I'd be even more infamous, I have about 290 more votes than I though I may receive so I'm happy, and the voting page has not been the shit-storm (so far) that certain people prophesied so all in all it has been a successful and very interesting two weeks. I suppose the question is who will "he" choose after all this, and will any of us notice a difference? Giano (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm still betting that we will see 8 new arbitrators appointed. Five for tranche alpha and a new one for each of the three tranches. Maybe not, though. Congrats from me on the WP:300 as well. Looking at the final results, the final percentage of 58% was a little lower than I'd hoped for (I was hoping you would get above 60%). I was also hoping you would get second place in the supports column, but Raul surged ahead of you there at the end with a massive 20 supports on the final day (for comparison, Newyorkbrad also got 20 supports on the final day, and you got 11 supports on the final day). you did get 'first' place in the oppose column (but let's quietly ignore that...). You got a net support of 83, which is rather a good result, and you came eighth in that column. In terms of total number of votes, you and Newyorkbrad were miles ahead of the rest of the field. He got 567, and you got 541. I would recommend anyone running for ArbCom in the future to look at how he and you managed to get your fingers on the pulse of Misplaced Pages politics and become so, well, visible. And here endeth the commentary. :-) Carcharoth (talk) 14:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on a great campaign, and all the records smashed! Johnbod (talk) 17:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I also think 8 arbs will be likely be appointed. 5 to replace the resigning ones, 6th to replace Flcelloguy for inactivity since May (what a pity!). This gives us 6 minimum. However, expanding the top slice to 8 would allow Jimbo to appoint Rebecca and Raul, something I assume he would like to do since he likes them. I have nothing against these two particular candidates, btw. But generally, having an election whose rules are not announced in advance thus allowing the Master to adjust the appointments to his tastes seems crooky to my taste. But who cares? Anyway, I bet a bottle of Courvoisier that there is no way in hell that Jimbo would appoint Giano. I would be pleased to loose. So, any takers? --Irpen 17:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

In short Irpen - No! Seeing as I came 10th it is extremely unlikely - anyway could he afford me? Giano (talk) 17:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, Jimbo could win himself a bottle of Courvoisier if he's smart. Yomangani 17:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, Jimbo has recently committed himself to a, possibly, much more substantial expense, which suggests he is doing quite all right. So I guess it is not the matter of "affording" Giano. But I would be pleased to present Jimbo a bottle despite our disagreements anyway. --Irpen 17:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Instead of wisecracking here why not go and take a look at my new FAC which is languishing Giano (talk) 17:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Canvassing! Burn him! Actually, I had a question: is the ceiling design of the Queen's boudoir reflected in the floor (shiny floor) or in the design of the floor? Yomangani 17:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

So long as the ceiling has a cat-shaped hole, that is fine by me :) Ceiling Cat (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I was not canvassing, just making conversation as is my want - I will attend to your point immediately Yomangan (why didn't you just come back as YomanganII?) Giano (talk) 17:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I felt just adding II to my previous username showed a lack of imagination. Anyway, I must be off to a languishing FAC. Yomangani 18:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, not 8 then, maybe 9 new arbitrators! (Didn't know Flcelloguy had been inactive). Wow, if an arbitrator retired, that would push the total up to 10 and include you know who! Irpen, where's that Courvoisier? :-) As for "II" being unimaginative, I'm now trying to think of imaginative ways to mark account reincarnation. Two. 2. Deux. B. Secondo. The Sequel. The Return. Hmm. Giano - The Sequel. Now that would have been imaginative. Carcharoth (talk) 18:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Instead of being silly here, why not put some some names to the faces of the painting of the arbcom at the top of this page. Giano (talk) 18:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Starting from left:

Just to let you know

I'm probably going to be disappearing again. This time, I will certainly do a better job of covering my tracks. One of them (I have my suspicions who), had a secret checkuser run on me because of my participation in the whole Durova Affair. It was then used during my participation in a relatively minor issue at AN/I, after another user outed my first account. Admittedly, I did a poor job of disappearing the first time, choosing to do so into a little-used approved sock. The tag I placed on it identifying it as such was not oversighted (not sure if this was my mistake or the steward's), but I think that the whole situation further illustrates just how rotten the Arbcom process is currently. That a member would feel it necessary to run a secret checkuser on a supposedly "disruptive" non-involved editor during that case of all cases, is both ironic, and a bit disgusting. For the record, my vote was cast for you, using my old account (which had suffrage), and I wish you all the best. Fully realizing that WP:300 or no, Jimbo isn't appointing you, I'm glad of your run anyway. You and editors like you are what make WP bearable. Keep up the good work! Mr Which??? 20:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Take care. send me a clue if you ever re-appear! I have a huge dossier on "secret checkusers" I am saving for a suitable time and place. If ever I can help, let me know. I'm going nowhere of my own accord! Giano (talk) 20:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

You take care as well, and of course, feel free to add the diffs I provided to your dossier. I'll drop you some kind of indiscrete note to let you know who I am. I've already opened the account I'll disappear into, and watchlisted some pages from a couple of editors I respect, in order to maintain something like "contact" with a few folks I feel I can trust. Regards, Mr Which??? 21:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record, I don't consider East718 the "culprit" in the case of my "outing", but rather as a whistleblower of sorts. I would have never known a secret checkuser had been run on me by an arbiter had he not made it known. Mr Which??? 21:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Queluz National Palace

Hi again Giano. I went to the Queluz Palace this afternoon and took a few pictures. I've just uploaded four of the interior, as you requested. Apart from the king's bedroom one, I've already forgotten the names of the other rooms in the pictures (I may search for them later though). I'll upload more pictures of the interior/exterior tomorrow, as I have to study for an exam now. :-/ Anyway, I thought that you could have a look at these and possibly find them useful for inclusion, especially if you already know their respective rooms. Best regards, Húsönd 21:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I wow Husond! I know which they are don't worry - wow wow wow that's more exiting than a seat on the arbcom, we shall have to try and stop the FAC, while a re-write the interiors section, it will have to be Tuesday! Well done that's terrific! Giano (talk) 22:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Well they are in the page, a bit of a tight squeeze but they are staying. I think this has made this the complete page of its type, so few have interior photographs - how on earth did you take them, are they allowed - and no one else in sight - totally amazing! Brilliant. Giano (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes well done - mid-December is certainly the best time for tourism - I remember my ten minutes alone with the Mona Lisa years ago! Johnbod (talk) 16:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, I'm back from a very busy day and I've just uploaded the rest of the pictures in case you'd be interested to review them for eventual insertion in Queluz National Palace. Thank you for the compliments by the way, I'm very glad to have contributed for the visual improvement of this excellent article. Well, I don't recall seeing any no-picture signs inside the palace, but it's most likely forbidden anyway. Three or four women were surveilling the entire palace but they obviously couldn't keep a permanent watch on every single room, so they patrolled back and forth like androids. I just had to wait till the coast was clear in order to take the pictures. I couldn't do that in every room though (such as the Ambassadors' Room), coz they would linger and not go away sometimes. And indeed, I was very surprised with the virtual absence of visitors on a Sunday afternoon (when admission to the palace is actually free of charge). I counted only four visitors (including myself). Anyway, here go the pictures. Some of them came slightly tilted, I didn't notice that from the camera preview. I'm a lousy image editor, so perhaps you or someone else could rotate them just a few degrees in order to fix that.

Hmm, is the FAC ending later today? :-/ I'll drop by later and support. Best regards, Húsönd 02:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Very nice - the miniature is a presepe or Nativity scene surely - shepherds below, Magi above (See new Nativity of Jesus in art). It is much closer to La Granja (palace) than Versailles - French garden pavilions & all. Lovely weather you're having! Johnbod (talk) 02:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I kinda thought about the presepe too but... did they have elephants in Jerusalem? ;-) Húsönd 04:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, about as many elephants as windmills perhaps! Johnbod (talk) 10:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Not that it is likely to be claiming to be historically accurate, but elephants weren't unknown in Jerusalem by the first century. The Romans ran into them for the first time in the third century BC, were troubled by a bloke called Hannibal who had a few, and were slaughtering them in the arena for entertainment by 55 BC. The Syrian regent Lysias is said to have had 30 or so war elephants in the army that battled Judas Maccabeus outside Jerusalem in 163 BC. There was a resurgence in interest in exotic animals as symbol of power in the late 15th/early 16th century after which inclusion of them in works of art was more common (see Dürer's Rhinoceros, Abada, Hanno and the Medici giraffe). I assume that's supposed to be Baltasar on the elephant. The shepherds are obviously getting a visitation on the right, but what is going on on the left? Looks like a fight. (The Blessed Punch-up perhaps, only available on the limited edition DVD). Yomangani 11:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Elephants were also known to the armies of Alexander the Great following the conquests of Egypt and Persia. See crushing by elephant for an account of the fate meted out to the enemies of Perdiccas (it's in the crushing by elephant#Western empires section). Carcharoth (talk) 11:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Aren't those nativities normally from Naples and surroundings? There's a big collection of them in Munich (Bavarian National Museum, also here). What's really weird is that it appears to depict a Cretan (like this) or Cycladic windmill at the centre. Truly odd. Well, as odd as the elephants... athinaios (talk) 23:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I saw the latest - as you say, an excess of riches in images! I'm sure there's no fatwa on linking to images that way. Since I'm just writing bits of the Visual arts MoS (a page as unfrequented as Queluz on a mid-December Sunday), I'll add a nihil obstat there for waving if necessary. It's a good place to make your prejudices official. Johnbod (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The only problem with doing this, I can see, is that the link is not listed on the images own page, so some clever bot will come along and say it is an orphan image! How can we overcome that? Giano (talk) 23:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Most easily, I think, by creating a gallery at the bottom of the Queluz Palace article. Of course not everyone's a big fan of galleries (I personally think they should only be used in a fairly limited range of cases), but it ought to be justifiable in this context (?). athinaios (talk) 23:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I hate galleries at the bottom of pages. It looks like people are too lazy to write the text. I will just keep writing trying to fit more in and linking to the others. The commons image link serves as a gallery really. Giano (talk) 23:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Although I aesthetically agree (kind of), I think you're not entirely right. Look at the galleries on Fayum mummy portraits (end of page), Art in ancient Greece (end of sections - well, apart from the section I wrote), and Venus figurines (end of page). In those contexts, they are of some use (as long as they are properly labelled) and probably more so than simply on commons. (To avoid misunderstandings, I created none of those galleries, although I lifted and modified the third one from French[REDACTED] ). athinaios (talk) 00:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

It only looks like that if you don't write captions, as most don't. My examples Halo (religious iconography), one of mine that works for its living I think, or the ones in the History of Western fashion period articles eg 1650-1700 in fashion - key to text sections beneath. Johnbod (talk) 00:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know there are exceptions, I saw one for the 1812 Gallery at the Petersburg Winter Palace the other day - that is fine but this is not a page like that, every picture tells a strory and the story can be told and will be it will just take a few hours more writing - if you could keep an eye on the copyediting so any one reviewing for FAC is not put off enpugh to oppose. It is doing OK there at the moment. Giano (talk) 07:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't tell you how horrible that looks on my monitor. The azulejos picture blocks the text and title of "Queluz, National Monument", there is a long row of edit links behind and Chinese and European ceramics and, none of the photos are anywhere near the text that refers to them, the citations are sandwiched into a thin column in the centre with whitespace taking up a third of the screen on the left, and the pictures eventually tail off just after the end of see also. How about putting a gallery at the foot of each section? Yomangani 12:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh hell it looks fine on my screen! I'll take a look. 12:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Sod! It looks completely perfect on my screen everything neatly in the right place to what it refers to. Would taking out the azulejos picture right everything? Giano (talk) 12:27, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it is a problem when the resolution of the screen is higher, because it takes a lot less space to finish the text while the pics stay the same size. What about a layout like User:Yomangan/Q (ignore from the Grounds down - I didn't want to spend a lot of time on it if it looks rubbish)? That looks OK on my screen and I think it should be OK on lower res screens too, and it keeps the pics close to the text that discusses them. Yomangani 12:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to format like that. It looks OK ish, can the pictures be put into boxes, it looks as though the captions are irregular. Giano (talk) 12:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll have to go and look up the markup, unless there are any wikitable experts hanging around. I'm a bit rusty with all this wiki stuff. Yomangani 12:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Right I have just reverted to a better version from yesterday, or Geogre is going to. This is the version with all the extra information that is the finished page - we just need to sort the resolution out - somehow! Giano (talk) 12:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Giano's version looked fine on mine & the 2 across ones on Yomangan's did, but I had to scroll to see all the 3 across one. Johnbod (talk) 13:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Have you borrowed a screen from the Lilliputians? I'll try and shift those three across ones around. I switched to thumbs in the tables, is that closer to what you meant Giano? Yomangani 13:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I fiddled with the alignment of the three across ones, can you see them now without scrolling JohnBod? Yomangani 13:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

It all looks fine to me, except the three together, my screen is not wide enough, even after your fiddling!! Giano (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there room for the south facade (the one on the extreme right) togo up under the steps in the section above. Giano (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I put the other façade up, as it is not as tall and so the text stands more chance of reaching past it on higher res screens (if you understand what I mean after that explanation I'll be amazed). How is it now? Yomangani 13:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

That looks good, what if we dispensed with the final shot of the ceremonial facade and fountain which is vety much like the lead anyway, is there room for the sphinx to come down into the final section - a sort of cheery conclusion. Giano (talk) 14:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure that's possible, but the sphinxes are mentioned in the "Grounds" section with an "(illustrated below)" tag. Do you want to handle that differently? (I'll move it anyway, we can always revert). Yomangani 14:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Well they still will be illustrated below, that can be see final illustration or whatever, I think we had better go with this version - Thanks for your help - do you want to paste your version into the article? Giano (talk) 14:27, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. (now wait for somebody else to say it looks horrible on their screen!) Yomangani 14:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for this. I will mention the new layout on the FAC page and hope for the best. Giano (talk) 14:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks fine on mine - certainly better. Well done! Johnbod (talk) 14:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Shame you have both already voted! Is this not one of Wiki's best illustrated pages ever? Giano (talk) 14:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

On other people's screens generally, I found this excercise/survey recently very revealing - it seems visual arts editors generally have very small screens! Johnbod (talk) 14:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

It is probably the same theory as men with big noses and feet. Giano (talk) 14:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I know nothing about big feet, but I've given the article a good review at FAC, after having done a tiny bit of copy editing. The combination of excellent prose and gorgeous photos made for a very pleasurable noontime break. I checked the layout using two different screen resolutions and it seemed fine on both. Risker (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks that's what we wanted to hear. I don't really understand what caused the problem, I have never experienced it before, perhaps there is just one or two many images and it tipeed the scales, yet I'm sure I have had that density of images before - all very odd. Thanks for the vote. Giano (talk) 17:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

One more question, about the King's Bedroom. Are the columns made of glass that is mirrored, or are the columns covered with mirrored glass? I am just having a hard time believing that glass columns (mirrored or not) would be sufficient to support the dome, but I could stand to be corrected. Risker (talk) 00:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Heh..I'm sorry.

Oh man, I can't believe I just did that! I'm so sorry, I just found about the elections less than an hour ago, and I have been racing against the clock to get my vote in. I bet I did this more than once. Well, your right, there is next time. Thanks for informing me! :)-BlueAmethyst .:*:. (talk) 00:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry, it appears they closed the voting 30 seconds early, but it would not have made any difference to me anyway. Thanks for the vote though I appreciate it, its the thought that counts. Giano (talk) 00:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I still wished that I could fix my edit.  :)-BlueAmethyst .:*:. (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Steward election

Hello, could you please confirm the account on Meta is you, by providing a link to your userpage there, otherwise your vote will not count. Thanks. Redrocketboy 03:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

To elaborate this is called crosslinking... (and what is odd is that I thought you had this all sorted last year since you voted then...) Anyway you need to crosslink your account. You can do this by doing an edit here (to your user page, perhaps) saying you have an account on Meta named Giano II, and then on Meta, giving the diff of that post (about the account) on en saying it is you on en. Or you can if you want set up a fullblown WikiMatrix like my userpage on Meta references. (it's really best that it is something that one does for ones self). Once you do this it also counts for board elections.

Thanks again for your support, hope this is not too much trouble. By the way I have my fingers crossed that Jimbo will see reason and not go by strict numbers when he makes selections. Your election campaign and the outpouring of support you received was remarkable. Win or lose, my sincere congratulations and best wishes. ++Lar: t/c 03:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Here it is created over a year ago. Giano (talk) 08:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I think they want a link in the OTHER direction but what you just did is such a thing. I've taken the liberty of ... feel free to revert me if you want and do it over yourself in your own style. And congrats again on your achievement. ++Lar: t/c 16:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

If you get a chance...

I know you're busy with actual content creation , but if you get a chance, you might want to take a look at this thread I started at AN/I. It's in regard to a horrendous block placed by a Guy you know pretty well from the whole Durova fiasco. If you don't feel like weighing in, I totally understand. But, I've rarely seen more bite-y behavior from an admin on WP. Mr Which??? 00:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Never mind. You might still find it interesting, but Tj is unblocked now. Mr Which??? 04:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid in my view Guy is too fond of throwing his weight and opinions about, seldom attempting to see anyone's POV but his own and those of his immediate circle. Sadly no-one seems inclined to change that situation. I've more interesting things on at the moment than worrying about situations that are unlikely to be addressed. The encyclopedia has the authority it chose, now it can live with it. Giano (talk) 07:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought that might be your take. I pretty much agree. It took much doing to convince him yesterday that blocking a new user with no warning, and with bitey, snarky responses when the user became upset wasn't the best course of action. I don't know how often I've got it in me to challenge ludicrous blocks like that. Mr Which??? 12:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't bother wasting your time. He seems much admired so let him be. Plenty more newbies out there, what's one lost. More importantly what does this look like on your screen Palace of Queluz - it looks like it is going to be difficult to format. Giano (talk) 12:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

(<---undent)

I have a narrow screen here at work, so it might not be the best viewing format, but right now, it seems very "graphics-intensive." The writing's beautiful, the pictures gorgeous, but something about the combination of the two isn't working perfectly just yet. With the size of my screen, I can't put my finger on what, but when I get home this evening, I'll take another look. My home computer has a much wider format, and I'll be able to offer a better perspective. Mr Which??? 13:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

hopefully it is now fixed. Regarding the above matter, it appears Guy does not care for advice as I could have told you! Giano (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I was wanting a full review of his actions at ANI, but one of the admins (one of his admirers, perhaps?) archived it before anyone really had a chance to comment much. I expressed my outrage at this, Carcharoth responded, and I responded again, moving the archive template to the bottom, in an attempt to minimize the drama. It was clear that even those who disagreed with him (like Carch) weren't willing to really take him to task about it, as should have been done. I wasn't interested in prolonging it, if it were just going to become an echo chamber of "not good, but it's okay anyway." I'm not shocked at all that he blanked Irpen's advice. He did the same thing to the thread where multiple editors had commented after he was finally convinced to lift the indef block. That's what shocked me (though it probably shouldn't have): an indef block for a non-problematic new user?!? Wow. Mr Which??? 15:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• About par for the course! No one wants to do anything about it, I don't blame Carch he knows the score, I expect too. Giano (talk) 15:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Is it just because of who JzG's friends are that no one is willing to directly challenge his actions? As for me, I'm going to start focusing much more on content. I'm something of a decent writer, and in a year or two, I want to have added so much great content (like someone else I know) that they wouldn't think about banning me for the hell I raise regarding abusive admins! Mr Which??? 15:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Are they firends? I don't know, and to be frank I don't much care. You forget the "harm" I did to the project just attempting to point out the shortcomings of our management. We shall just have to wait and see who is onthe new Arbcom and if they are prepared to do anything about it. Unless I have the call from on high (most unlikely) I shall continue to happily remain with those writing the encyclopedia a place many seem unwilling to occupy (see Wetman's comments below). Giano (talk) 16:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Archiving is a curse. Be aware that that's just one editor's opinion. It's like a "fact" tag: it weighs exactly as much as any other edit. I believe that "archiving" is used foolishly very often. The proper use of it is to make the page easier to read. When an issue is a few hours old, when more opinions are coming in, and when there is still consensus forming, any archiving is illicit: it's then being used not to aid the reader, but rather to try to stop the conversation. We're about conversation. If two parties are only involved, and if they're debating each other, then both need to get off AN/I and go to proper media. If it's more than that, it's an issue, and issues don't go away when they're painted purple. Mind you, I haven't looked at the above, so I'm not endorsing, but I will say that archiving is getting overused and misused. I wouldn't suspect a friend. I would suspect merely someone trying to assert the divine right of admins, which I always find suspect. Geogre (talk) 18:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I will admit, it irritated me greatly, but after I posted a note below the archived portion protesting the action, Carch (whom I respect) left a note, and I felt he was right in stating that there's no consensus amongst admins to stop JzG's abuse, so I probably couldn't expect much more than his (Carch's) disavowal of JzG's actions as not being the best course of action. As I was interested in an actual informal review of JzG's behavior, and not in simply increasing the drama level, I felt it was best to thank Carch, and move the archive bottom tag below my comments. Mr Which??? 21:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I have jusr had a moan on Jimbo's page, not that it will do any good, but it does make one feel better to get the odd word in his ear when Durova stops to draw breath for a second. Giano (talk) 22:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it will do any good, as you said, but doesn't hurt to try. As for JzG, it's blowing up on ANI again. I've got to get out of there, though. It's seriously distracting... Mr Which??? 02:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Whose oar is in the water?

Giano, you will be amused, though not surprised, to hear that according to a paper published November 4, by Reid Priedhorsky, Jilin Chen, et al. (University of Minnesota), "Creating, Destroying and Restoring Value in Misplaced Pages" (in this pdf file), "only one-tenth of 1 percent of Misplaced Pages editors account for nearly half the content value of the free online encyclopedia, as measured by readership."

Alas for the measurement by readership, whereby Penis and Paris Hilton doubtless get more hits than any architecture article. Nevertheless.... --Wetman (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I can understand people looking up penis, because that is a useful thing to have and want to know about..... but Miss Hilton? Giano (talk) 15:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I have had the dubious honour of meeting Miss Hilton, and I can quite assure you that there is no valid reason for an encyclopedia article about her. Risker (talk) 21:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I think I am the champion of unread bytes. Take a look at all those brand new articles I've done on subjects that no one cares about, with prose that no one reads, and I submit that, if I didn't go to namespace from time to time, no one would know I existed (until their -bot tried to put a template, box, tag, or assessment on one of my unread bits). Long, long time since spire. A long, long time since A Tale of a Tub. Geogre (talk) 19:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Oh well done Geogre, shall I start an award scheme for those who ignored pages - suggestions on a the back of a postage stamp please but I warn you I have pages that have not been edited for two years! Giano (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Least read page would be one award, but most unread pages and most unread bytes would be other categories. I'm a shoe-in for the last of these and possibly the second. I fear, though, that some mathematics subgenre formulary alternate name non-Euclidian topology editor might have squeaked by either of us on the second award, just for sheer repetition of 3-liners saying something unimaginable in a way unintelligible to persons inconceivable. Geogre (talk) 21:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Re. Nice pictures

The Portuguese version of the only external link on Pousada de Dona Maria, Queluz, contains a section on the history of the building. I'll use it to extract some material for the article. Regards, Húsönd 17:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I wish you would, I have been doing a little Portuguese translation of my own this afternoon, it is ctually surprisingly easy if you know Italian and French it is quite easy to make sense of it - I wonder if I'm the first person to discover that. Giano (talk) 19:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

By the way Giano, if you'd ever be interested in expanding Sintra, Pena Palace, Monserrate Palace or Regaleira Palace, I may help as well. It's a shame that Sintra is currently just a big stub, there's so much to write about it. Regards, Húsönd 03:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Did you see my suggestion regarding photo placement at the QNP talkpage? Mr Which??? 03:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Your recent edit to Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents caused the entire bottom of the page to appear in a grey box. Could you fix your edit, please? And while you're at it, could you reword the comments to be less confrontational? Nobody is going to desysop Guy at WP:ANI. You'll have to file an RfA. Corvus cornix_talk 23:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Certainly not! The page should not have these archive boxes placed all over it anyway. When something is ready to be properly tidied away and archived then it may be removed. When the previous comment is only an hour or so old is far too early, no matter how exaulted the subject of the conversation may feel themselves to be, and what's more bad admins can be de-sysoped whenever and however by the Arbcom or Jimbo if they dfeel so inclined. Giano (talk) 23:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

So you don't mind that you managed to put a grey box around every other comment below yours, on other threads? I see somebody else cleaned up after you, anyway. The arbcom is not going to sysop anybody without an RfA, and you know that. And Jimbo isn't going to just jump in and sysop somebody who isn't being majorly disruptive. Corvus cornix_talk 23:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Zscout anyone? Mr Which??? 23:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

What a lot of nonsense you do talk Corvus cornix. If people want to go placing silly little boxes here there and everywhere they cannot complain when they have to keep tidying them. Giano (talk) 23:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Gee, thanks, Giano. I'm glad you didn't make the Arbcom. I'd hate to see you suddenly jumping in without an RfA and start trying to get people desysopped on your own. In fact, if the voting hadn't already closed, I would have voted oppose on you due to your comments above. You don't mind totally screwing up the look of the ANI page just for your own petty reasons? Corvus cornix_talk 23:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Just stop. It's not aboout you, Corvus. It's about the project. Mr Which??? 23:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I have to say that throughout the time I have observed you Giano, you have been most reliable in your choice of behavior. 1 != 2 23:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Glad you think so. I pride myself on being constant. Corvus, I could not care less what the ANI page looks like if sections are archived before I or anyone else has finished commenting. Especially when that archiving is being done hurriedly to spare the blushes of a bad admin. If an admin is bad the Arbcom or Jimbo can remove him - simple as that. It has happened before and will happen again. I am delighted you did not vote for me, in my support column you would have found yourself amongst a very different crowd, many of whom would quite like to see some changes about the place. Giano (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The familar line of the usual suspects popping up at this page every time Giano says something about adminitis adminning is predictable indeed. 1=2 can always be reliably expected on such occasions. Mysterious coincidence by all chances. --Irpen 23:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Please provide one, single, solitary example of the ArbCom desysopping somebody without an RfA. Corvus cornix_talk 23:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

User: Carnildo! Giano (talk) 23:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you point me to a link where that occurred? I'm not aware of the history of that. If what you're saying is true, then I'll apologize to you. Corvus cornix_talk 23:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Jimbo (the fearless leader of Arbcom) desysopped Zscout without one (and I'm pretty sure you mean an RfC). Mr Which??? 23:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Very, very, very, briefly, and only because Jimbo himself was involved in the discussion. And no, I mean an RfA. The Arbcom doesn't take RfC cases. Corvus cornix_talk 23:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Go away Corvus and do your homework, you are becoming tedious. Giano (talk) 23:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, then you mean an RfAr, not an RfA. I was just clarifying. Mr Which??? 23:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I did do my homework, and, lo and behold, I find Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war. And lo and behold, Carnildo was desyssoped after an RfA(r). So your contention that the arbcom has ever stepped in and desyssoped somebody out of process has yet to be verified. Corvus cornix_talk 23:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Not as well as you seem to think ! Giano (talk) 00:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Wasn't Everyking desysopped without a formal RfAR being opened? Cla68 (talk) 00:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Everyking, Carnildo, ZScout. Additionally, it has become de rigeur for people to "quit," like Soviet administrators resigning when they embarrass the party, and some even have the gall to claim that they should regain their bits as if nothing had happened. However, "without opening" and "without concluding" are different matters. The Carnildo mess occurred long before RfAR had even sat, much less concluded. The whole thing happened within minutes. El C was also caught in that and mistreated without any process.

Set all that aside, though: the "archived, so don't say anything" is absurd. I complained about it just above. In fact, it is so out of control that AN/I may indeed be serving a small set of users at this point. One of the findings of fact recently was that AN/I has a "noticeboard culture." I opposed that. I said that it does have a presumption of guilt, that it was populated by a set of characters, but that it received far too much input to be monolithic. Well, that's only if input is allowed, and "archived to preserve peace" is no way to get input, no way to respond, no way to resolve conflict, no way to investigate, no way to serve. Shame on anyone who would archive sooner than 24 hr. Shame and suspicion on anyone who would do so to prevent multiple points of view.

I haven't seen Giano's comments, but on the "what care I for your archive formatting" issue, I agree. It would never be a problem if we didn't use the "archive" crap. If no one invoked it, no one could protest it. If people didn't overuse it and use it to preserve their own dignities, no one would protest it. That's just sauce for the goose. Geogre (talk) 02:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Check out my talkpage "redesign." Let me know what you think. Mr Which??? 03:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Back to content (everyone, remember what that is?)

On your assorted stately-home meanderings, are you planning to do anything with Ham House and Marble Hill House at any point? I'm in the process of writing a batch of linked articles on the geography of the area (first priority, to make something decent from the truly wretched Hammertons Ferry — "the ferry operates on the river", indeed) and in doing so have noticed just how sorry these articles are, given the architectural significance of the houses - but as I know virtually nothing about 17th-18th Century architecture, anything I do with them will just be an internet cut-and-paste job. — iridescent 02:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

...or how about Roger Morris (1695-1749)?--Wetman (talk) 11:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• Very nice page Wetman. All three look very good without expansion from me, allthough Ham could do with a little love and attention, and I would remove the outrageous claim made by the National Trust in the lead. I have rather mentally forsaken England for the time being for some of the lesser known wonders of the world elsewhere. 2 FAs in one month is pushing it, even for me so I'm having a break from big pages until after Christmas. My try and find something different from architecture to occupy me over Christmas. Giano (talk) 12:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't we find a bland little overview from a source... a DNB or some of the other Dictionaries Of? The account now is kind of pragmatic but offers questions. For example, I look at him, and I see a political climber, probably university but poor. What is he doing on Harley's land? It's possible that he was artisan class and simply did the work well, but then he's a lot less of an architect and a lot more of what we today would call a civil engineer. In fact, the "virtuoso" (good term for them) architect peers must have had men with them who knew what stresses would do, as I doubt they themselves knew. I'm sure they had to say, more than a few times, "Lord Foppington, you simply cannot make a house look like a leaping kangaroo and build it out of mud brick." This Morris sounds like he has a story to tell. (I'm Mr. Politics when it comes to DWEM's and in the 18th c.) Geogre (talk) 12:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and I should work on Mrs. Howard. Marble Hill has been featured in those tourism-heavy shows done by Edward Windsor recently, and her story is interesting. If you guys build up the article, y'all should really get a whiff of how and why it got built and the architect's political mission. "Build a house for the prince of Wales's girlfriend, but make sure that it won't annoy the queen too much, or the princess, and make sure that Mrs. Howard can get to the prince easily and the prince to Whitehall while he's staying with her. Oh, and she's Tory, so make sure that it reflects the values of the King and Country party, but don't make it look too royal, or else everyone will be horked off that it looks like the tories are saying that she's the real princess...." It has to be one of the great problem commissions of all time. Geogre (talk) 12:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hats off!

Congratulations on bringing Queluz National Palace to Featured Article status. I'll look forward to seeing what comes next! Risker (talk) 05:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, congrats! And never mind my question about "improving" it at the talkpage. It's evidently pretty damn good as it is! :) Mr Which??? 05:05, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I cannot take all the credit for this one, it was proper team-work - which Misplaced Pages is supposed to be. Fsouza who started the page - Bishonen and a whole army of copyeditors, a final very rigorous one by Qp10qp. Yomangan sorting the layout and some image editing, and for me, the star of the show Husond and his professional quality photographs. Many of those photographs are better than those in the reference books I used. Its amazing to think photographs taken on Sunday are in a FA by Thursday. I think this will be my favourite page for a long time. Where shall we all go next? Giano (talk) 08:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you make a wikiproject/gang of you that are up for getting pics of the interiors of stately homes etc? There are a lot of nationalities on wiki, probably a lot of people in the south of the UK, so it could go global. Someone who lives round there really needs to do something about Royal Pavillion. There are no pics of the interior there, it looks sh*te, there's even a pic of a grave or something, when it really has interiors full of dragons and all sorts of decadent stuff. Grrr can't find much online but we're talking about a city and building that was sort of a hub of decadent debauchery, and maybe the city still is lol!Merkinsmum 17:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• Have you been sent here by Jimbo to try and encourage us all to get ourselves arrested, the reason there are so few interior shots is that photograhy is normally banned in these places to make one buy an expensive picture post-card which is then copyrighted. In England middle-aged ladies are employed who patrol wearing tweed skirts and pearls who on the very sight of a camera transfor themselves to banshees screaming "no phawtawograwphy on National Trust prawperty" if one persists they open their capacious handbags produce an iron bar and bash the offenders brains out. In Italy it is the same except they are very beautiful younger ladies. In America at Biltmore they even claim that one is not allowed to publish an image of the place inside or out without their permission, which is bolox. Husond has been very brave on our behalf but already a Portguese lady in tweed and pearls with an ] mounted on the roof of her Renault is probably stalking him as we speak. Giano (talk) 08:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should seek recruits at WikiProjectBDSM? Johnbod (talk) 11:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

sssssh, we can have a seekrit wikiproject planned with seekrit msn chats.:)Merkinsmum 11:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Sintra

Congratulations on bringing Queluz National Palace to featured status, Giano! :-) I'm extremely satisfied that my pictures came on a good time and helped this achievement. However I think that you are still the one to be most congratulated. Without your intiative, thorough research and hard work, the pictures wouldn't have done it. So, if you are interested in the articles I suggested, perhaps we could start working on the Sintra one. Sintra is both a town and a municipality with so much to see and write about (such as the Queluz National Palace, which is naturally within its borders). I currently live just a five minute drive from Sintra, so it's not hard for me to provide visual resources (I already have quite a few pictures of Sintra at my gallery). By expanding Sintra, you'll realize that one will at the same time gather a lot of material about its palaces, such as the Pena Palace, my favorite and certainly one of Europe's most beautiful buildings. Again, congrats! Best regards, Húsönd 13:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Not that you lack recognition, but here's a barnstar for bringing Queluz National Palace to featured status. Thanks for your dedication. Best regards, Húsönd 13:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Giano, it was great what you did for the Queluz National Palace. The text and photos (by Husond) are just wonderful. It's really a pleasure to me to see an article related to Portuguese art history reaching that level of quality. Best wishes, Fsouza (talk) 14:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Heh, thanks for the barnstar. :-) Regards, Húsönd 18:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Likewise, you can see how rarely I hand them out by the practiced way I leave them on pages! Giano (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• Well the Pena Palace certainly looks interesting, the problem is because it is a hybrid pastiche it is not written about in too many books, so while I could write a pretty detailed architectureal description of it and explan its ethos etc, I would not be able to reference it. I will look arownd and see what is available. With such a mixture of styles we would certainly need a plan to explain and refer too, I can draw one (as at Queluz) but I need one to work from first (Queluz came from the google satelite image!). I'll do some research and see what is possible. Giano (talk) 00:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

That stairway again

I wasn't going to insert this, but I think the term for what the architect did with the steps was a form of forced perspective. He didn't do it the usual way (tiny steps higher up to make them look farther away), but he did do forced perspective by having the diagonals differ from the horizontals. Geogre (talk) 15:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

The Wessex Children

Dear Sir, you are cordially invited to join a discussion on this matter at WikiProject British Royalty. Yours in anticipation, DBD 16:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Why me? Giano (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you work much on biographical articles?

I've got a few in mind I'm thinking of writing from scratch, and I could use all the help I can get, once I upload my initial work. Are you interested in working on an author article, as well as a minor historical figure or two? Mr Which??? 02:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I have done some biographies Simon Byrne and Hannah de Rothschild are the two largest (and most diverse), but I have to be really interested in the subject or I lose interest before the end, my user space is littered with unfinished pages. So I would not want to commit to any collaberations for fear of letting you down. Giano (talk) 07:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I may hit you up for some help after I've got most of the work done, just to get your input as to style, if you don't mind. And I might poke my nose in a bit on your next collaboration, just to see what's going on, and if there's anything I can do to help. Regards, Mr Which??? 14:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Australian wine

Was reading David Lauder's talk page.. you actually like our wines? Didn't know anyone actually liked our wines, even though we seem to be making a hell of a lot of it these days. DEVS EX MACINA _pray 07:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know you were "down under" Devs, I have to be honest and say I don't like Australian wine, some of the reds are OK, but for my taste they have too much fruit and are too big. I'm just not man enough for them I suppose. That is not to say I have not managed to force a few glasses down in my time - now some of the New Zealand whites are very nice indeed. Somebody told me that the Australians keep the best for themselves! Giano (talk) 07:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

In the "cheap" price range of <$10 US/CA, I find there are a few Australian Shiraz/Merlot/Cabernets that are superior to American Napa Valley reds. AU whites are more hit and miss. But in that price range there are quite a few French & Italian wines that put both AU and the US to shame...--Isotope23 14:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

In the UK Le Piat D'Or (don't know if we have an article with it in) is one of the only wines which is guaranteed not to taste rough and give you a bad head the next day, IMHO, for under £5. Having said that, I'll still drink whatever's to hand depending on my budget lolMerkinsmum 23:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Appparently they needed the help of Australian wine-makers to make it bearable to our tastes in recent years.Merkinsmum 00:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Try "Baron Philippe de Rothschild, Cabernet Sauvignon" under £6 a bottle so long as you buy a case, very F rench and very quoifable and no bad head either! Giano (talk) 00:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Of the sparkling wines, the most famous is Perth Pink. This is a bottle with a message in, and the message is "beware"! This is not a wine for drinking, this is a wine for laying down and avoiding. Another good fighting wine is Melbourne Old-and-Yellow, which is particularly heavy and should be used only for hand-to-hand combat.Eric Idle 11:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Trivial compliment

Pardon me if this is a waste of your time but after recently discovering you are behind the Queluz National Palace article I wanted to thank you for the wonderful read and the smarts I acquired. Cheers, 76.10.141.10 (talk) 15:59, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

That's kind. Thank you. Giano (talk) 12:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007

This is your only warning.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User talk:Tony Sidaway, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. _→AzaToth 17:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)