Revision as of 11:32, 22 May 2007 editCarcharoth (talk | contribs)Administrators73,579 edits →"Bickering": nice joke, Giano← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:33, 22 May 2007 edit undoGhirlandajo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers89,657 edits →the hated infoboxes: <edit conflict>Next edit → | ||
Line 380: | Line 380: | ||
::Tony, another notable anti-box lobbyist for you is ]. And you're into composers, check out from Geogre's talkpage, offered up by ]. Fortunately a historical version. ] | ] 10:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC). | ::Tony, another notable anti-box lobbyist for you is ]. And you're into composers, check out from Geogre's talkpage, offered up by ]. Fortunately a historical version. ] | ] 10:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC). | ||
::: Fortunately indeed. Let them (boxes) burn in hell. I'm so tired of trying to explain to people that Misplaced Pages is not consistent and that it's not expected to be (]). After my return to English Misplaced Pages, I was flabbergasted to find all the articles about World Heritage Sites "prettified" by addition of ]. They were thrown into stubs without any regard for their size or potential image jams, as normally happens with infoboxes. Now they tell me that I can't remove them because they "have always been there". Those people don't care about facts, layout or presentation, their true idol is Misplaced Pages's imaginary consistency. --]<sup>]</sup> 11:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
*I've also written on infoboxes, but haven't organised stuff into an essay yet. The following repeats what I've said elsewhere, but my thoughts do seem to be coming together coherently now. In my opinion, they should be nothing more or less than a tabular summary of ''important and easily summarised'' points in the article - '''something to be scanned''' (similar to a tabular form of the lead section, but slightly different), while those wanting to ''read'' the article can do that and ignore the infobox. If a point is not easily summarised and is better treated by a paragraph or two, leave that point out of the infobox and refer the reader to the article or use a footnote. Also, infoboxes should only be used on articles that have enough points to be easily summarised. Short articles can be overwhelmed by infoboxes and if reading the article takes only a little more time than scanning an infobox, then the infobox should be removed and only restored if the article gets bigger. Also, infoboxes should be designed to be as specific as possible and not used generically across broad topics. Finally, infoboxes can be designed to contain numerical and similar data, but if this starts to overwhelm the infobox, then a databox should be placed further down the article in a relevant section, and linked from the main infobox. Infoboxes are difficult to do well, and easy to do badly. ] 11:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC) | *I've also written on infoboxes, but haven't organised stuff into an essay yet. The following repeats what I've said elsewhere, but my thoughts do seem to be coming together coherently now. In my opinion, they should be nothing more or less than a tabular summary of ''important and easily summarised'' points in the article - '''something to be scanned''' (similar to a tabular form of the lead section, but slightly different), while those wanting to ''read'' the article can do that and ignore the infobox. If a point is not easily summarised and is better treated by a paragraph or two, leave that point out of the infobox and refer the reader to the article or use a footnote. Also, infoboxes should only be used on articles that have enough points to be easily summarised. Short articles can be overwhelmed by infoboxes and if reading the article takes only a little more time than scanning an infobox, then the infobox should be removed and only restored if the article gets bigger. Also, infoboxes should be designed to be as specific as possible and not used generically across broad topics. Finally, infoboxes can be designed to contain numerical and similar data, but if this starts to overwhelm the infobox, then a databox should be placed further down the article in a relevant section, and linked from the main infobox. Infoboxes are difficult to do well, and easy to do badly. ] 11:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:33, 22 May 2007
Old messages are at
- User talk:Giano archive 1 (2004)
- User talk:Giano archive 2 (2005)
- User talk:Giano archive 3 (2005)
- User talk:Giano archive 4 (2006)
- User talk:Giano archive 5 (2006)
- User talk:Giano archive 6 (2007)
Welcome back Giano. Paul August ☎ 19:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
License tagging for Image:GianoSpedaledegli.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:GianoSpedaledegli.gif. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 20:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- No I have not - now bugger off and read the text you daft bloody bot! Giano 20:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- LOL! Don't forget the wise old saying (from someone whose name I forget), "foolish is he who directs anger at a fool (ie. a bot)..." :-) Of course, you are not angry, just dumbfounded, annoyed and irritated in equal measure (or something). Carcharoth 11:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Eleonora di Toledo
Hey, could you take a look at the recent history of Eleonora di Toledo, please, and the talkpage, and get in touch with the IP editor? (I told them I'd ask you to.) Bishonen | talk 11:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC).
- How very kind of you, she was not on my watch list any more, I only do Royalty and titled people if they are very wicked, very promiscuous, very amusing, or built a wonder of the world, Eleanora filled the last two categories, I have just responded on her talk - it would be a shame to make her too dull. Giano 17:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Would James I of England count? I put him up for WP:FAR, and he seems an interesting sort of person. Personal relationships of James I of England was an eye-opener. Carcharoth 11:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- How very kind of you, she was not on my watch list any more, I only do Royalty and titled people if they are very wicked, very promiscuous, very amusing, or built a wonder of the world, Eleanora filled the last two categories, I have just responded on her talk - it would be a shame to make her too dull. Giano 17:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Nope, James I is not in field of interest - nasty old drunk with some other strange habbits which were far from amusing - if people must get drunk then get witty-drunk, morose-drunk and buggering the valets is nasty for everybody, not only the valets. Giano 18:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Architectural elements
Sorry to bring down the tone, but we seem to be missing lots of basic architectural elements. I have made up king post - then found and assimilated king-post - which also deals with queen posts and crown posts. But there is no Dutch gable, no coach house or coachhouse, and no linen fold or linenfold.
O tempura, o teriyaki! -- ALoan (Talk) 17:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Are you studying Mandarin or something ALoan, you seem to be speaking very odly - there you a "Dutch gable" no there will be no references - I wrote it off the top of my head after a very long day - so go and add....Giano 18:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Leoni & Buckingham Palace
Hi Giano, I'm wondering if you're also "this" Giano? I've come across the archived discussion while I was looking for information about Giacomo Leoni (for the German Misplaced Pages). "Giano" (you?) has written there that the Buckingham East façade was influenced by Leoni's Lyme Park. Do you know if there's literature about it, or how did you fear about it yourself? The internet seems to distribute it largely as more or less direct takes from Misplaced Pages... or at least I don't find anything useful there. So maybe you could help me out? Thanks a lot, Ibn Battuta 18:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sadly, yes that is me, new to wikipedia and knowing even less about FAs than I do now, regarding the Buckingham palace and Lyme Park comparison, the Leoni page was written ages ago before we were expected to cite our references in the way we do now - I will have to find the books I used to write that page - which I don't have with me right now - basically Leoni was introducing a type of Italianate architecture a form of Palladianism - which eventually evolved into the 19th century "municipal street architecture" of which Buckingham Palace's early 20th century face-lift is an unremarkable prime example - the obvious comparisons between the palace and Lyme are the central triple arch, double pilasters terminating the centre bay, and most obviously the box like structure over the pediment, which I think at Lyme was a 19th century addition - to replace a cupola - I will find the books next time I am home and ref it. Giano 22:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Great, thanks a lot, and especially for the details about the influence! When you're talking about the triple arc, you're probably referring to the central arcade at the street level, right? - BTW, according to Lyme Park - Disley, Cheshire (NT), on UK Heritage, the cupola was simply never built because the owner didn't like it; and Wyatt's addition came around 1817... Thanks again, Ibn Battuta 02:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Sunnyside Hospital, Christchurch
I thought you might be interested to know that the former Sunnyside Mental Hospital, designed by Benjamin Mountfort and built in 1892, is now being demolished. (Radio New Zealand) I have mixed feelings; on the one hand we're losing a heritage building, on the other it was probably a horrible place for those unfortunate enough to be committed there.-gadfium 06:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- It does seem a pity that a country by comparison with Europe and America fairly poor in 19th century architecture can demolish a building like this Image:Sunny Side Asylum.jpg by one of its most eminent architects. One has to though evaluate its possible further use - in London it would be converted into luxury apartments or offices. I agree with you I don't think 19th century mental hospitals were known for their comfort and therapy - more places to tidy these people away off the streets - but that is part of a cultural heritage too - one would knot demolish the Tower of London because some pretty horrible things repeatedly happened in it's basement - or the Alhambra of Caserta because they were built by forced slave labour - all equally horrible if not worse. It seems though most of Mountfort's work is already demolished and what remains in an administrative wing by John Campbell. Here is the official assessment of its architectural worth - if there were ever an appeal a decent planning lawyer could nuke that assessment in five minutes - The Council here saving the admin building "Ensure effective ongoing protection of the Administration Building through the Council purchasing the building," and interestingly "There are a number of potential options for future use of the building, ranging from craft studios to a cafeteria, to accommodation. Certainly, its potential role as an important community facility can be promoted." and yet suddenly here they have given permission for its demolition - if that were my country's heritage I would want to know why - Designed by Mountfort or Campbell, it is immaterial, it is a rare piece of 19th century Gothic and part of NZs very sparse architectural heritage - as I said a decent planning lawyer could save it on those reports alone. Giano 08:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Sp.?
No, you're wwrong... there's no grrr in "Logrenzo"...I looked it up. and while I must agreee that plans and planned is something of a case of superfluous redundancy, I have to tell you that "appear" has only two Ps. Are you trying to ggett at me orr wot? Let me inform you, that if you have ever beeen in a rainstorm when half the Sahahara Dessert was dumped on Rome, thwen you'd know why most of Ancient Rome was invisible. Wot's more to the point...don't you know anything about the Renaisssance in Russsia? It only needs one litttle parragryph? By the way, what have you done to offend Lady Catherine? Not more baroque toilet humour, I hhope? --Amandajm 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
No! wait a minute.... maybe it only has one P... well anyway, it has one or two but it deffinitely doesn't have three.
- I have no idea what it is you are talking about - do you have some diffs? Giano 14:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Biography infobox
Could you please explain why you feel there shouldn't be an infobox on Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery? Errabee 13:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I was surprised to see that page had been nominated here for whatever an "A class" biography is, end even more surprised to see someone obviously more familiar with the A Class biographies than me felt it needed an info-box - It does not. In my opinion info-boxes on biographies appear like thise horrible cards children collect - are they given free with soap powder or something? Whatever - the subject was not a president of the USA, a reigning sovereign, just a woman who happened to be for a short time to be an "It girl" of late Victorian society - there is no justifiable need for an infobox. This subject has been discussed ad-nauseum on Wikipediam and still it won't go away. Giano 15:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just dropping by to note my complete agreement with Giano on this issue. Infoboxes are widely overused; while there are a few articles on which they are useful (articles about U.S. presidents, countries, stuff like that), there's certainly no need for them on articles like the one under discussion here or on smallish things like Jean Baptiste Perrin, where the infobox is actually longer than the article. A pox on the silly things! Kelly Martin (talk) 15:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Try this version of Perrin without the infobox. Carcharoth 11:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just dropping by to note my complete agreement with Giano on this issue. Infoboxes are widely overused; while there are a few articles on which they are useful (articles about U.S. presidents, countries, stuff like that), there's certainly no need for them on articles like the one under discussion here or on smallish things like Jean Baptiste Perrin, where the infobox is actually longer than the article. A pox on the silly things! Kelly Martin (talk) 15:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I was surprised to see that page had been nominated here for whatever an "A class" biography is, end even more surprised to see someone obviously more familiar with the A Class biographies than me felt it needed an info-box - It does not. In my opinion info-boxes on biographies appear like thise horrible cards children collect - are they given free with soap powder or something? Whatever - the subject was not a president of the USA, a reigning sovereign, just a woman who happened to be for a short time to be an "It girl" of late Victorian society - there is no justifiable need for an infobox. This subject has been discussed ad-nauseum on Wikipediam and still it won't go away. Giano 15:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, first of all: A-class is the next best thing Misplaced Pages has to offer after Featured Articles. The current example for an A-class article of the Biography project (Linus Pauling) does not meet the criteria for A-class (much to my annoyance, as I have a Ph.D. in quantum chemistry, spent time at Caltech in 1989, and attended a lecture by Pauling, already an icon of the scientific world in his lifetime). Anyway, sorry for digressing, but we needed a new example of what an A-class Biography article should like. The situation in the Biography project has always been that anybody could give an article an A-class rating, which has led to some very sorry excuses for articles getting A-class ratings by their creators. So, I've been searching for an A-class rated article that deserved that honor, and I thought Hannah Primrose was an excellent article, which could well serve as example. As for your (and Kelly Martin's) objections to infoboxes, I'm not sure whether to agree or disagree. I'm quite sure however that in any encyclopedia where anybody can edit, attempts to create uniformity across articles of the same type are very important. If the biography infobox is a means to that end remains to be seen. The (lack of) infobox is however not a severe enough point to deny the Hannah Primrose article (exemplary) A-class status. Errabee 21:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think Hannah is a very representative example of a GA, Errabee. It should be an FA, if anything. The reason it's not is that Giano is PO'd with the stuff that happens to FAs and FA writers on FAR/FARC. Being abused for defending your work isn't a happy experience, I guess. Bishonen | talk 10:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
- Hannah is a stunningly good article, I have to say. My poor little Typical Striped Grass Mouse looks quite pathetic beside it! ElinorD (talk) 12:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- What a cute little feller! :-) Stripey like a wild boar piglet. I want one! Bishonen | talk 23:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
- He is rather cute. But, um, aren't you the owner of a very dangerous reptile? I wouldn't dream of handing one over to you. I'd be afraid you might give it to her! ElinorD (talk) 23:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Pet! Not snack! bishzilla ROARR!! 01:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC).
- He is rather cute. But, um, aren't you the owner of a very dangerous reptile? I wouldn't dream of handing one over to you. I'd be afraid you might give it to her! ElinorD (talk) 23:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- What a cute little feller! :-) Stripey like a wild boar piglet. I want one! Bishonen | talk 23:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
- Hannah is a stunningly good article, I have to say. My poor little Typical Striped Grass Mouse looks quite pathetic beside it! ElinorD (talk) 12:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Give all the boxes to the 'zilla to play with. I'm sick of people who can't write articles sticking horrible ugly standardised boxes on otherwise decent articles. Such people probably think that is it cool to have a bumper sticker on your car, or keep your CD collection in alphabetical order. We are quite unworthy of them.--Doc 23:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I had not thought about it like that, just like those dimwitted, homespun, happy looking people who drive about in fiestas and such like announcing they have "a baby on board" - they only do it so they can park closer to the door at the supermarket. That's my theory anyway Giano 06:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- I once, in a moment of weakness, arranged my library alphabetically by author. It looked horrible. Baby on board stickers have generated a lot of urban myths. Hopefully our article doesn't repeat them. Carcharoth 23:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I had not thought about it like that, just like those dimwitted, homespun, happy looking people who drive about in fiestas and such like announcing they have "a baby on board" - they only do it so they can park closer to the door at the supermarket. That's my theory anyway Giano 06:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Give all the boxes to the 'zilla to play with. I'm sick of people who can't write articles sticking horrible ugly standardised boxes on otherwise decent articles. Such people probably think that is it cool to have a bumper sticker on your car, or keep your CD collection in alphabetical order. We are quite unworthy of them.--Doc 23:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Minor renaming
FYI, User Giano/Villa Medicea di Cafaggiolo was misnamed, putting it in the main article namespace. I've moved it to User:Giano/Villa Medicea di Cafaggiolo (notice the colon) Raul654 23:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you Raul! Giano 07:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Speaking of which, which is less peculier, Gustav Utens or Giusto Utens? --Wetman 00:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Wetman, thanks for the contributions - very welcome, my info was drying up a little! Have a great picture to scan later today to demonstrate the architecture. On the subject of Utens ...I hate to complicate the issue further...but I always knew him as Justus Utens (as he is referred to in "better" Italian books!!!, but all my text books seem to translate him as Gustav! Lets see what google, that well known arbitrator of these matters says: Giusto 50,000; Gustav 797; Justus 812. Which is pretty conclusive - Wetman wins not only a pack of crayons for the "April Art Prize" but also the oportunity to write Giusto Utens - seriously there is stacks of his stuff on commons, I'm amazed he is a red link. Giano 07:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- The stuff on-line all consists of reproductions of the lunette paintings, which garden historians pore over with jeweller's loupes, and JSTOR articles on the villas themselves (which I can get to, but they don't offer any details on Utens). Precious little on-line for Justus/Giusto himself. I've made a weak slender stub translating from it:wiki. It will fix a redlink though. --Wetman 07:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- That's fine - far better than nothing - a lot better in fact! Giano 10:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Old Bishops Palace, Oslo
Apparently James I of England got married there. Worth an article, or a stub? Carcharoth 10:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Though I see you are busy again. Looks nice. Carcharoth 11:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds more like Bishonenland to me, than my own sunkissed territory - I'm sure you can write it yourself - are you sure he actually attended the wedding there though? Giano 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Apparently so. You are right. I should try and do something myself. How would I begin assessing whether it is notable enough for an article in the first place? Age? Architectural style? Hang on. I've just found an absolutely fascinating document. Good Lord! Look at this: - a translation of contemporary Danish accounts of the wedding!! Excuse me while I pop back to the James/Anne pages. Carcharoth 12:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- if like me you work surrounded by architectural books it is easy, but even they are likely not to have much on that building, so I would just google, but use only the reputable academic referenced sites, not holiday and tourist sites as they tend to lie to make holiday destinations more exiting. Then try and find some old painting or print that is out of copyright or better still pursuade Bishonen or one of the the other Nordics to get on their bike, sled, skis or dog (or whatever is the favoured mode of transport in those parts) and take a picture. Giano 12:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Reindeer at a Gallop. Bishonen | talk 20:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
- OK. Thanks. Carcharoth 12:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- have you got a link to it, I can't even find a photo Giano 12:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Er. This is the best I can do for now... I'll keep looking. Carcharoth 12:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Er indeed! Is that it? - it doesn't look to be in a very good state of repair, does it? Giano 12:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds more like Bishonenland to me, than my own sunkissed territory - I'm sure you can write it yourself - are you sure he actually attended the wedding there though? Giano 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
<unindent>LOL! I think I need an archaeological writer, not an architectural one! :-) More seriously, I looked more closely at the contemporary source I quoted above, and the author of that added a footnote. Main text: "Earl George Keith, a Scottish Marischal and ambassador, led her Highness into the old Bishop's Palace". Footnote: "Not of course the present one, which used to be the Dominican Monastery." Anyway, I'm giving up on this, unless an Oslo resident can shed light on it all. Carcharoth 12:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I hate to give up, but it does not look very hopeful, there must be some Norwegian editors here. Giano 12:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Also, looking at Oslo#History, it seems that there isn't much history before it was rebuilt after fires in 1624, which is after the time I'm thinking of. Oh well. Looks like they got married in a cow shed in Norway. (that's a joke!) Carcharoth 12:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- You could try User:Egil he seems to have the requisite qualifications (he is Norwegian and edited Oslo cathedral) which is about as good as we are going to get. Giano 12:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. He now has two posts waiting for him! Carcharoth 12:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I hate to give up, but it does not look very hopeful, there must be some Norwegian editors here. Giano 12:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Are you talking about the building constructed by bishop Nikolas in the 1200s, now under the Oslo Ladegård? Replaced by a Renaissance building in the late 1500s (a new Renaissance building would be ideal for a Stuart royal wedding) and then replaced again by a Baroque building in around 1720? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- That might indeed be the one where James and Anne got married, though it is strange they don't mention it if so. I'm also curious now about the contemporary building called "Old Bishop's Palace" in Oslo. As pointed out above, this might be the closest you will get to an idea of where the old place was. Search for "Bishop". Carcharoth 13:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- And there is more. The bishop's name, which I eventually worked out from that document as being a Jens Nilsson, is listed at Oslo Cathedral#Bishops of Oslo as being a Bishop of Oslo from 1580-1600, which fits with the dates of their marriage of 1589. So I'm now wondering what the Hallvards Cathedral mentioned at Oslo Cathedral has to do with this Bishop's Palace? Carcharoth 13:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Jens Nilson? - you can't have bishop called Jens Nilson sounds like an olympic skier or porno star Giano 14:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- And there is more. The bishop's name, which I eventually worked out from that document as being a Jens Nilsson, is listed at Oslo Cathedral#Bishops of Oslo as being a Bishop of Oslo from 1580-1600, which fits with the dates of their marriage of 1589. So I'm now wondering what the Hallvards Cathedral mentioned at Oslo Cathedral has to do with this Bishop's Palace? Carcharoth 13:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- He has an article on the Norwegian Misplaced Pages. Which leads to their article on the Oslo Cathedral, but still leading to dead ends, really. And tis source says they married in Kronborg Castle. Hmm. I'm going to stop there until more information emerges. Carcharoth 14:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- False alarm. Kronborg Castle was the proxy marriage in August, before the real marriage later that year. Carcharoth 14:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- He has an article on the Norwegian Misplaced Pages. Which leads to their article on the Oslo Cathedral, but still leading to dead ends, really. And tis source says they married in Kronborg Castle. Hmm. I'm going to stop there until more information emerges. Carcharoth 14:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- This is all becoming very complicated - are you sure this page is a good idea? Giano 14:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Probably not. But I think I've found enough to satisfy me what is going on, even if no page results from all this. Have a look at this Norwegian page, which has references to a "Christen Mules gård" where James and Anne were married (confirmed by this, which says: "On 23rd November the royal couple stood in Christen Mules Gaard, in the great hall"). Now look at the picture on that Norweigian site, and look at the page ALoan provided earlier: . Same place. Only remains to find a reliable source linking "Christen Mules Gaard" to "Oslo Ladegård". More reliable than another wikipedia, anyway. And sadly, no extant Renaissance building. Sorry to have taken up so much of your time, and thanks for helping out (both you and ALoan). Carcharoth 14:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
That's a good start... :-( Carcharoth 14:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- And this truly is the end of it, I promise! Carcharoth 14:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Norwegian sources
Studying Norwegian internet resources I found that up to the middle of the 16th century (i.e. when James I was born) the bishop of Oslo resided at the location where Oslo Ladegård was since located. See also no:Oslo Ladegård. The current Oslo Ladegård is from the 1720s, but there is a room in the basement, called bishop Nikolas' winter hall, which is from the original bishops palace. The original bishops palace was built in the 1200s.
During the reformation (1537?), the power of the bishop diminished. At some time after this (not really sure when) the king in Denmark threw the bishop out of the old palace, whereafter he moved to the Olavs cloister, which after 1537 was no longer used (it was founded in 1239 by Dominicans). The "new" bishops palace (or building) was in fact built in the 1880s at the location of the cloister ruins.
James and Anne were married at the old Bishops Palace in 1589. -- Egil 20:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Egil, that is terrific. Carcharoth will be able to start on his new page, his first easy venture into architecture, in the morning - I immagine he has his nose in his Norwegian phrase book as we speak. Thanks a lot your time will not have been wasted. Giano 21:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- As Giano said, thanks! That really makes things a lot clearer. However, I do still have a few more questions... I've replied at your talk page. Carcharoth 09:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Templates or whatever they are called
In the time it took you to make this edit would it not have been just as quick to correct the link yourself, rather than slap an insightly template or whatever they are called on a perfectly good page? Giano 18:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, but I was not sure and now you fixed it so it worked as planned. Thank you. Rettetast 18:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- If you do not understand simple English - should you be slapping templates here there and everywhere? Giano 18:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- No need to be rude. I see that could have solved the issue myself but since it was an FA it would have been fare worse if i corrected the link to a wrong location. Peerage of Scotland. Have a nice day. Rettetast 18:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- If you do not understand simple English - should you be slapping templates here there and everywhere? Giano 18:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
QVJIN
The unsightly red link was why I started it, but I haven't got very far. I've got a long weekend coming up, but I need to hang around as I'm on call. So I should have plenty of time to get a Queen Victoria Jubilee Institute for Nurses stub done. Cheers! Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Dashwoods
Giano,
I'm sorry to trouble you, but I'm wondering if you can clarify for me something about the Dashwoods of West Wycombe Park, as you seem to have access to Tim Knox's book about the house. Did the estate pass from Sir George (5th Baronet) to his brother Sir John (6th Baronet) for the remaining year of Sir John's life, and then to their nephew Sir Edwin, 7th Baronet (as the article now reads), or directly from Sir George to Edwin? The 11th Baronet's history of the family suggests the latter, but he gets his genealogy all muddled up in that particular generation, so I'm inclined to believe that the estate and the baronetcy were inherited together. If you could confirm that in Knox, it would put my mind very much at ease.
Yours, Choess 05:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- No problem I am reading it now as I type: The family tree on the back cover states: George Henry 5th Baronet died in 1862 - he has his name in capitals denoting ownership of the house, he is succeeded by his brother Sir John Richard 6th baronet who also has his name in capitals denoting ownership - the 6th baronet is succeeded by his nephew Edwin Hare Dashwood in 1863 again in capitals - so from the book it appears all three owned the house. Now I'll look in the Dashwood's at west Wycombe section. Page 58; aha! "The 5th Baronet died in 1862 leaving his widow a life tennancy of the house, she lived on there for another 27 years" then it goes on the 6th Batonet never lived at WWP but died the following year - so it seems he owned the house, but his sister-in-law was in occupation as a tennant. It later states on the same page (58) the 7th baronet inheirited in 1863 but could not live at WWP because his aunt was in occupation, when the 7th baronet died in 1882 the old lady was still there. Page 59,"perhaps despairing of ever ejecting Lady Elizabeth from WWPhe returned to New Zealand...in 1889 came news of Lady Elizabeth's death and he returned to England to take possession". It appears they all owned the house, but had to wait for the 5th Baronet's widow to die. She was incidentally formerly Elizabeth Broadhead who married the 5th baronet in 1823. I had better check now and make sure that ties in with what I wrote at WWP!. Regards Giano 10:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Comedy gold!
I saw this bit you said at ANI: "As is becoming all too frequent I expect Cyde is correct"... LOL! That is classic comedy. Ahem. We now return you to your scheduled service. Carcharoth 14:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- That's a really bad picture of Kelly... :-) Carcharoth 17:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you Laurel and Hardy, I'm not sure what the inference is there from either of you but I advise you both to remember this page is watched by people just waiting to issue legitmate bans....and worse! So proceed here with caution. Giano 18:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Tsarevna vs. Tsesarevna
For example, this photograph from 1870 is titled "Tsesarevna Maria Feodorovna with Her Son Nicky". --Ghirla 10:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
F2K has left the building
Email me instead. -- Roleplayer 21:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Ca' Foscari.gif
When I tagged it, there was no indication you took the photograph and thus no indication who gave permission to release as GFDL. You edit of the summary cleared up the issue nicely. -Thanks Nv8200p talk 23:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Julie d'Aubigny
I had known of the lady for decades, at second-hand, but the chevalier de Mailly recently introduced us. I think she is a lady for your galleria delle donne, Giano. Her Misplaced Pages page is dreadfully tame and limping. It needs to be tuned up to concert pitch. --Wetman 04:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- "Avoid women wealding weapons" - if that is not an old proverb somewhere n the world, it should be. Giano 11:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Bastard brothers
Just thought you might like to know I've added a small amount of info and a pic to your page. Jasper33 19:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm delighted to see the page further expanded and with such useful information. It is not "my page" though but thank you for the courtesy of telling me and referring to it as such. However, if you check the history you will see others helped ather the information there so it is nice to have another editor contributing to it. Giano 20:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Never was very good at expressing myself clearly. Hmm, perhaps I shouldn't be editing ... By 'your page' I meant 'the article that you started'. Anyway, I've bunged a bit more in, and am still kicking myself for not taking my camera with me yesterday when I visited the Mezzanine Room. Jasper33 10:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, and I'm kicking you too for not taking a camera! Giano 12:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ouch! I'll take it next year, promise. 'Ornately decorated' ain't the half of it - it looked like the plasterwork had been done by someone on some mind-expanding drug, quite overpowering in such a small room. Plus each panel of the two-panelled doors had different carved decorations (presumably to serve as a 3D pattern book?) adding to the general quease. I like my Georgian architecture plain and simple. Jasper33 12:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above person is probably English! They never bave taken to or appreciated the Baroque. Giano 12:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You got me bang to rights, guv'nor. Jasper33 12:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Beacause the very best English Baoque is hidden and unknown! Giano 13:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Still too twiddly-diddly for me. Going back a few centuries, this is more my kind of place. Sigh. Jasper33 13:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Beacause the very best English Baoque is hidden and unknown! Giano 13:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/John Alves Arbuthnot
and Alexander George Arbuthnot etc. I don't disagree. My problem is that if I add stuff I get accused of WP:COI or WP:ATT (because it will probably also be on one of my sites) and is likely to be nominated for fact nn or afd by the Irish republican cabal who seem to be attacking articles I create or amend. It is less trouble to hoist my own articles on my own pages. One of my reasons for putting these pages on wiki is to gather further data from other people - ONIH is 100% wrong in suggesting I am creating a WP:WG. - Kittybrewster (talk) 11:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry I'm not au fait with half your abbreviations such as WP:COI or WP:ATT neither am I aware of your problems, sorry as I am to hear about them. I'm afraid, I'm a long way from being Irish - either republican or whatever the opposite is. I trust you did note I voted "keep" albeit not very glowingly.
- I comment on the page as a wikipedia biography. As a Misplaced Pages biography it is in my opinion very limited. I have not looked at all the Arbuthnot pages but the ones I have seem do seem very limited and hurried, for instance I read the one about the Duke of Wellington's "Mrs Arbuthnot" that could be considerably expanded from just reading a couple of Wellington biographies or even an hour's internet research. My point is that even someone disinterested in the subject has heard of her yet you have still provided limited information. It seems to me you have created the category at the expense of the pages. Were all these pages created "to blue" red links of one great featured article I would commend you, but they were not. I think you should slow down a little and add some more content. I do wonder if you would not have more success expanding them if you posted them to a family history site rather than Misplaced Pages. However, I shouldn't worry doubtless others will disagree with me, and you have broken no Wiki-rules by creating all these stubs so it doesn't really matter much. Giano 11:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Again, I agree. I was hoping others would expand them. As you say, it would be constructive and not difficult. - Kittybrewster (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have written Misplaced Pages biographies myself, and am delighted when others expand them, but I generally find it (when possible) beneficial to give prospective editors a sound foundation to work on first by adding all the information known to me. Quality not quantity! Giano 12:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Again, I agree. I was hoping others would expand them. As you say, it would be constructive and not difficult. - Kittybrewster (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I comment on the page as a wikipedia biography. As a Misplaced Pages biography it is in my opinion very limited. I have not looked at all the Arbuthnot pages but the ones I have seem do seem very limited and hurried, for instance I read the one about the Duke of Wellington's "Mrs Arbuthnot" that could be considerably expanded from just reading a couple of Wellington biographies or even an hour's internet research. My point is that even someone disinterested in the subject has heard of her yet you have still provided limited information. It seems to me you have created the category at the expense of the pages. Were all these pages created "to blue" red links of one great featured article I would commend you, but they were not. I think you should slow down a little and add some more content. I do wonder if you would not have more success expanding them if you posted them to a family history site rather than Misplaced Pages. However, I shouldn't worry doubtless others will disagree with me, and you have broken no Wiki-rules by creating all these stubs so it doesn't really matter much. Giano 11:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Those wacky Arbuthnots...
Hi Giano. Saw your comment on the AfD Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/John_Alves_Arbuthnot -- so doesn't that mean you can change your vote to a delete? :) BTW, as a newcomer I recently asked whether anybody in wikipedia gets clout not merely by admin tasks but by good writing. Your name immediately came up, and I've enjoyed looking at some of your work. Take care. HG 14:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Did it? How amazing where? No I don't want to change to delete because because the wretched man is just notable - he founded an existing bank, that bank it today very old and established - so he can have his name here as far as I'm concerned. Giano 15:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, your name came up when I asked some q's in IRC, I think it was #wikipedia boot camp. (Didn't log it, as I gather is policy.) I find it somewhat disheartening that the hierarchy is so oriented to admin, anti-vandalism, and squabbles. (And useful but sometimes drawn out mediations.) Why aren't there senior editors to help improve our writing/content? I notice that Citzendium (sp?) is separating the admin from editorial leaders. Maybe for each project/area we should list the top editors and article designers. Ciao, HG 15:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I can imagine my name would pop up quite quickly on IRC. I hope you have a very long and happy time here. I find if one does not take the more vocal admins too seriously and just gets on and does one's own thing it works quite well here too. Good luck and happy editing Giano 15:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, your name came up when I asked some q's in IRC, I think it was #wikipedia boot camp. (Didn't log it, as I gather is policy.) I find it somewhat disheartening that the hierarchy is so oriented to admin, anti-vandalism, and squabbles. (And useful but sometimes drawn out mediations.) Why aren't there senior editors to help improve our writing/content? I notice that Citzendium (sp?) is separating the admin from editorial leaders. Maybe for each project/area we should list the top editors and article designers. Ciao, HG 15:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Did it? How amazing where? No I don't want to change to delete because because the wretched man is just notable - he founded an existing bank, that bank it today very old and established - so he can have his name here as far as I'm concerned. Giano 15:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up about the accidental clue to my identity, now purged. Please do not post my personal information again, else I'll be back. HG 18:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- You don't scare me, I can lift 25Kg. So as we say in the old country "Fuck you, asshole" except of course we say it in Italian. Giano 18:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- lol, or as we
saysaid in the old country, gai feifen ahfen yam! Except we said it in High German. HG 18:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)- Well then I suggest you extract your finger from your yam and go write a page! Giano 18:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- lol, or as we
- You don't scare me, I can lift 25Kg. So as we say in the old country "Fuck you, asshole" except of course we say it in Italian. Giano 18:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I too have noted your comments, but why isn't anyone able to address the real problem here: the all too obvious and deliberate stalking and AfDing of articles with the surname of Arbuthnot by the same people? The notability issue is just an excuse. David Lauder 20:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you feel that is the problem, then discuss it in the appropriate place not on my page. Thank you Giano 20:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- My apologies. David Lauder 20:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you feel that is the problem, then discuss it in the appropriate place not on my page. Thank you Giano 20:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Opinion wanted
You seem like an editor who's been around a bit. I've been doing some work on Real Irish Republican Army (looked like this before I started). Do you think it's up to a good enough standard to take it to Good Article review? Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 07:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not realy up to speed with the requirements for the wiki-competative writing competitions, but it does seem to have a forest of foot-notes which they will love. Personally I like a longer lead and few pictures to look at, and it may be a little short, also it seems to end a little abruptly. Are all the facts correct? - I though they had decided not to use Physical force Irish republicanism, but I don't really follow the subject in any great depth beyond what is in the newspapers. Nominate it, as they will give you the advice as to the criteria they require. It is seems to be an informative page though and well written. Giano 07:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
It's difficult to know what else to put in the lead, except possibly the Omagh bombing as that's what they are most notorious for. Pictures are problematic, as you can imagine there's not many pictures of the group in action. Any that I could find would probably be fair use simply because free ones are impossible to create. There's an Agentinian editor who's found plenty of photos for PIRA articles who I've asked to see what he can find, hopefully he'll come through. The PIRA have stopped using physical force Irish republicanism, but the RIRA reject that as a betrayal of republican principles, so they are carrying on regardless. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 07:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've hopefully fixed the rather abrupt end to the history section anyway. One Night In Hackney303 07:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Sir Evelyn Delves Broughton, Bt
Please can you tell me authoritatively with a citation the value of his estate c.1994? - Kittybrewster (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, I know nothing about the man. Far from my subject Giano 18:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- One of the broadsheets may have reported it. Is this sort of information available from the probate registry? But you will need to do your own research, I am afraid. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah Aloan! How nice to se you, I did see while perusing my Times this morning that that funy lady with the hat who drank weed killer was his grand-daughter - is that any use? Giano 11:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Daughter. That is where the dubious claim is made. - Kittybrewster (talk) 12:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know that you like obituaries ALoan but I hope this, from her page, is nothing to do with you "...and his life partner,..." - what pray is a life-partner? I'm not sure if that is an example of political correctness of just middle class naffness - whatever it is it is quite horrible! Giano 11:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Daughter. That is where the dubious claim is made. - Kittybrewster (talk) 12:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah Aloan! How nice to se you, I did see while perusing my Times this morning that that funy lady with the hat who drank weed killer was his grand-daughter - is that any use? Giano 11:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- One of the broadsheets may have reported it. Is this sort of information available from the probate registry? But you will need to do your own research, I am afraid. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, how interesting (well, in a morbid kind of way). She sounded like a very interesting person - I had not realised that she was related to this baronet. I tend to steer clear of people who are likely to get done anyway (like Lord Weatherill, for example).
I guess a "life partner" is what we would until relatively recently have called a common-law spouse. I just did a former High Court judge with similar sensitivity ("...his partner for 38 years..."). Until very recently, we would have had to read between the lines, from his "close relationship" with his mother and that wonderfully succinct paragraph - "He never married." -- ALoan (Talk) 12:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- This chap was her father, by the way - her paternal grand-father was Sir Jock Delves Broughton, Bt., who committed suicide the year after he was acquitted for the murder of Josslyn Hay, 22nd Earl of Erroll. Her husband's father also committed suicide, it seems. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you ALoan, I do not concern myself with the doings of those on the lowest rung of the British title system. Yes I saw he drank weed-killer too, they must have a very careless gardener to keep leaving all this stuff lying arownd unlocked. He is the one I blame! I saw white mischief - I liked the scene where whatsername pulls back the curtains sees the sun shining and says "another lovely fucking day" and then blows her brains out. I experienced very similar emotions once on a photographic safari in Kenya after being trapped in a landrover with the same British people, one of whom was a baronet, for a week. Giano 12:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Jack's page is pretty terrible, actually - I may do him anyway. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes very true Aloan - but actually only Swans have life partners, in my experience that is the seldom the case with people these days - anyway what is wrong with.........no let's not go there you go and see to Jack. Giano 12:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong at all, as far as I am concerned. Live long and be happy. It is nice to see such matters in the open, in so far as the people concered want these things to be open - the way that Lord Browne has been treated, for example, makes me very sad (although lying in court is never a smart idea). -- ALoan (Talk) 12:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Cheer up
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
Despite your best efforts you failed due to circumstances beyond your control, but your valiant attempt to help someone in need should not go unnoticed. One Night In Hackney303 09:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC) |
Thank you - the only person in need arownd here is me - in need of a drink! Giano 09:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Judging by your edit to Caitríona Ruane you've had enough to drink ;) One Night In Hackney303 12:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
My edits
Do you have a problem?--Counter-revolutionary 14:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think you are going to very shortly. Giano 14:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Why? I wondered why you went through numerous articles I created that's all. --Counter-revolutionary 14:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was tagging then for references. I did leave an edit summary. Giano 14:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know, just wondered why you chose mine. No matter. --Counter-revolutionary 14:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Natural progression from what I was looking at before. Giano 14:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know, just wondered why you chose mine. No matter. --Counter-revolutionary 14:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was tagging then for references. I did leave an edit summary. Giano 14:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Why? I wondered why you went through numerous articles I created that's all. --Counter-revolutionary 14:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think you are going to very shortly. Giano 14:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Image:2LORD-ROSEBERY.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:2LORD-ROSEBERY.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Misplaced Pages:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Madmedea 21:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- The copyright is quite clear, it is mass produced cigar box lable dated 1890. The licensing tag is also quite clear as it always has been. Thank you. Giano 06:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I never disputed the copyright, only the absence of a source. Although there was a heated debate on this last night I think it is still clear that all images should have sources to add verifiability. We just need a less arsey template to notify users with. Madmedea 14:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I am afraid it is impossible to tell you tha name of, a probably, underpaid anonymous artist in Havannah who painted the mass produced label for a box of cigars in 1890. The only thing certain is that the copyright has expired. Giano 14:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I never disputed the copyright, only the absence of a source. Although there was a heated debate on this last night I think it is still clear that all images should have sources to add verifiability. We just need a less arsey template to notify users with. Madmedea 14:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I still don't understand why you think a source is necessary for an image like this, which is clearly out of copyright.
If you "never" disputed the copyright, why are you adding brassy templates that say "the copyright status is unclear" (no it is not) and "you will need to specify the owner of the copyright" (no he will not as it is clearly out of copyright) and "please add a proper copyright licensing tag" (already has one) and then a embolded threat to delete the image if Giano does not comply with your unreasonable demands for extra shrubberies -- ALoan (Talk) 00:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Palladian architecture
OK. Thanks for the kind explanation. --MichaelMaggs 05:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete, delete, delete
You seem to have got the hang of this deletion business, I see. A potential new career as a deletionist, perhaps? I always thought that was User:Geogre's department, but you seem well suited to the role so far. -- ALoan (Talk) 22:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Rules
Without implying a reference to anyone or any specific remarks which may or may not have been made by anyone now or previously alive or to any specific event which may or may not have recently occurred.......
I am not in favor of automation which supersedes human thought or overrides human action. Nuclear weapons require two keys and two separate individuals to launch for a good reason.
Humanity sets itself apart because, in theory, it is capable of independent thought and self awareness. Computers and automation are only as good as the collective which programs them.
Nuff said.
Peace in God. -john Lsi john 20:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm quite sure we are indeed all peaceful within God. Thank you for sharing that with me. Giano 20:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I hope you are not one of those manic beaming people who insists on giving everyone a hug during the Peace? -- ALoan (Talk) 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. T'was intended to be agreement. Without placing judgment on the quality of the decision, I have a disdain for automated processes which make contextual decisions in lieu of humans. ;) Lsi john 20:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- So do I! Praise the Lord! Giano 20:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. T'was intended to be agreement. Without placing judgment on the quality of the decision, I have a disdain for automated processes which make contextual decisions in lieu of humans. ;) Lsi john 20:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- and ... -- ALoan (Talk) 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- The Lord! - indeed "Our Lord" is not a joking matter, ALoan - please do not make silly comments because one day you will get to the golden gates and say "please let me in" and I will have been there a few days already and be brightly arrayed (having arranged several masses for my soul before departure) and will be in charge of entry and then quite a few Wikipedians will be saying - "Oh why was I not nicer to dear good Giano II when I had the chance. Giano 20:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- and ... -- ALoan (Talk) 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Did I make a joke? (Have you seen the Rowan Atkinson sketch?) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Small improvements still possible with the HA article?
Hello Giano. I see that a lot of weight is being placed on the Moncrieff article, which talks about Harriet Arbuthnot serving as the Duke of Wellington's social secretary at Number 10 Downing St. I wonder if this may not be true. (It sounds like Moncrieff might not be up with the latest academic findings, or know what is said in the various letters and diaries). Another area of improvement might be adding page numbers to some of the notes. Is it reasonable to try getting into this if it's already at FAC, or should I postpone this kind of thing till later? Thanks, EdJohnston 21:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- There should be page numbers where possible. Giano
- There are page numbers where aplicable. Giano 21:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- Regarding Moncrieff maybe he is aware of the latest finding maybe he is not, but he has published elsewhere from wikipedia - as far as I now he is not a wikipedia editor so he is a legitimately citable source - to question his work would be own research, that is a hard fact of wikipedia life. Having read over the last few days an immense amount on the wretched woman I think the role she assumed was that akin to a modern social secretary but a very controlling one - it is a pity we cannot write our own conclusions because I think she was not his mistress but one of those irritating women who like to be "in the know" and more importantly seen to be "in the know". Her father died when she was young, needing a father figure she married an old man - and cultivated old men - she felt safe and unthreatened in their company, which suggests it was not sex she was after - Wellington would countenance no interference in serious matters of state but liked to have an attractive woman on his arm who not only organized his social life but saw off the unwelcome attentions of other women - in return she had the fame and glamour of being his companion - and a certain fame from being a person known to be "in the know" and speculated upon. I think she loved the attention and her husband was probably a complete bore - so concluding I don't think Moncrieff was wrong to describe her so. Giano 21:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- In the FA review, you and Dahn had a difference of opinion about certain sentences. Do you mind if I rewrite the sentences in question? EdJohnston 02:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- It's the encyclopedia anyone can edit - so please do anything you may feel will improve the page but be careful becuase it is our job here to draw logical conclusions and summarise facts in rather the way a judge has for a jury who may be tempted to form their own wrong opinions. To draw obvious conclusions from cited facts is correct otherwise we would not need to write the page - just give the reader a list of internet sites and page numbers and senf them off on theor own to find out. Giano 06:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- There should be page numbers where possible. Giano
Pallant House Gallery
This might be more of a Wetman thing than a you thing, but this is what happens when you put a significant gallery of modern British art inside a Queen Anne townhouse in Chichester, and then bolt a modern brick block to one side (the architect designed the new British Library). -- ALoan (Talk) 10:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't now much about procincial British art galleried - my knowledge of Britain is confined to a corridor from London to the M25, M4 and A303. Sorry. Anyhow I'm about to start a new FAC with Bishonen. Giano 10:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- But there is a substantial Queen Anne townhouse! With ostriches and everything! -- ALoan (Talk) 10:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- ALoan, England is full of Queen Anne houses with or without Ostriches. I do not do Sussex - I have never been there. As Amandajn or whaever her name is she like that sort of thing. Giano 10:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- And what is more ALoan I am in a filthy mood today so best not ask me to be nice, in fact I'm not nice today - I'm totally pissed off. Giano 10:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- The edit of yours that you just cited appears to me a good summary of the problem with those articles. EdJohnston 15:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- ALoan, England is full of Queen Anne houses with or without Ostriches. I do not do Sussex - I have never been there. As Amandajn or whaever her name is she like that sort of thing. Giano 10:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- But there is a substantial Queen Anne townhouse! With ostriches and everything! -- ALoan (Talk) 10:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
"Bickering"
You are the first person I have seen blocked "for bickering" on a discussion page... Meanwhile, another user tells people to "get off their behinds", calls their comments "rubbish", indicates that an FAC contribution is an "abomination", and engages you in conversation telling people that "as usual, you're talking absurd". Yes, the FAC process is really going places... Dahn 08:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Gosh I had never seen that - well spotted :-). I'm often banned for my views and opinions, it's an occupational hazzard. I'm only testing the water at FAC to see if it has changed since I was last there - seems it's the same folk who inhabit FARC so vocally to. Nevr mind. Giano 08:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hm. I've looked through the (small) window of evidence on your block log, and, based on that, it seems to me that you have been systematically blocked over vague and interpretable issues. Nothing of what I have seen there would have called for a block (some editors who have called me and other all sorts of names still roam free on wiki, and the worst "offense" I have seen your history is telling someone that you do not expect him/her to understand a certain concept - which is not even particularly rude). Weird indeed. You have my sympathy, if that helps you in any way. Dahn 09:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the sympathy, I can well immagine several editors reading the above through gritted teeth, if not throwing something throught their screens. It is very sad truth that as the avenging angel of truth and a Nemisis I have been grossly misunderstood on wikipedia. I'm sure my reward will be in heaven, where quite a few would probably quite like to see me! I am indeed a saint on earth. Giano 11:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- LOL! You should take up a career as a stand-up comedian, Giano! :-) Carcharoth 11:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the sympathy, I can well immagine several editors reading the above through gritted teeth, if not throwing something throught their screens. It is very sad truth that as the avenging angel of truth and a Nemisis I have been grossly misunderstood on wikipedia. I'm sure my reward will be in heaven, where quite a few would probably quite like to see me! I am indeed a saint on earth. Giano 11:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hm. I've looked through the (small) window of evidence on your block log, and, based on that, it seems to me that you have been systematically blocked over vague and interpretable issues. Nothing of what I have seen there would have called for a block (some editors who have called me and other all sorts of names still roam free on wiki, and the worst "offense" I have seen your history is telling someone that you do not expect him/her to understand a certain concept - which is not even particularly rude). Weird indeed. You have my sympathy, if that helps you in any way. Dahn 09:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Gosh I had never seen that - well spotted :-). I'm often banned for my views and opinions, it's an occupational hazzard. I'm only testing the water at FAC to see if it has changed since I was last there - seems it's the same folk who inhabit FARC so vocally to. Nevr mind. Giano 08:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Spam filter running amok
Good morning sir, check out the above link for a reason why you keep getting that spam message when you try to edit, it seams like there's a problem with the spam filter. I'm no expert so take a look. All the best, Ryan Postlethwaite 11:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you it was a very worrying and stressful moment for me. Giano 11:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't quite know how you pulled through :-p Ryan Postlethwaite 11:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oh I'm like that gritty, resiliant, battling on against the odds for the greater good of wikipedia. Giano 11:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't quite know how you pulled through :-p Ryan Postlethwaite 11:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you it was a very worrying and stressful moment for me. Giano 11:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
See here
It's quite straightforward when you know how ;) One Night In Hackney303 21:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you 1NIH I have great experience in the subject! Giano 21:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know, the Arbuthnotnotables are falling like dominoes! One Night In Hackney303 21:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you 1NIH I have great experience in the subject! Giano 21:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Ridiculous?
How in heck am I being ridiculous? I was only trying to help list this AfD properly for you. I really think that you should assume good faith, and please don't fret about edit conflicts. Ten Pound Hammer • 21:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was in the middle of nominating when you decided to take it upon yourself to complete the operation, then leave odd messages in the comment section announcing you had done so, when in fact you had fixed the template incorrectly. Please allow people sufficient time to complete a nomination before deciding to help out, and then reposting your pointless message. Giano 21:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- My apologies if I offended you. I didn't realize you were still in the middle of the process -- but please, don't take it so personally. Ten Pound Hammer • 21:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Conflicting someone nominating a page with "AfD was improperly listed; I corrected it" is not helpful especially when you had not corrected it, and even if you had boasting about it on the comment page is not the place to do it. It is not possible to carry out the complete nomination process in les than three minutes, in future I sugget you give people at least ten minutes to get to grips with the system before bounding in like an over-hyped labrador puppy retrieving its first pheasant. You have not offended me, and I have not taken anything personally. Giano 21:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- My apologies if I offended you. I didn't realize you were still in the middle of the process -- but please, don't take it so personally. Ten Pound Hammer • 21:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was in the middle of nominating when you decided to take it upon yourself to complete the operation, then leave odd messages in the comment section announcing you had done so, when in fact you had fixed the template incorrectly. Please allow people sufficient time to complete a nomination before deciding to help out, and then reposting your pointless message. Giano 21:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Ex pede Herculem
Giano, anything you might add? --Wetman 05:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Have I not seen that at in real life at Chatsworth House Giano 06:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes you have you lucky dog. No, wait: this one is in Zurich. But is it not the funniest neoclassical sheet? --Wetman 07:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- There is an image here And the cascade, and the Emperor fountain, and the violin trompe l'oeil, and the remains of the conservatory, and ...
- Bess of Hardwick, what a star. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Who is the star, me or Bess of Hardwick? - when one puts one's foot in it as often as I do, beleive me one never forgets a foot - Glad to be of help, is that the lost foot refound then? - Do I get to claim a reward? - any humble sum would be welcome. Giano 17:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Good grief, do you mean to say that could be the foot Fuseli was drawing? I'd thought it was all in his over-heated brain... though there is that goggling head of Constantine...--Wetman 17:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I am sure Constantine would have found the search engine most useful. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Rockfleet Castle
Make ya wonder how much else is made up!--Vintagekits 17:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- You are a very wicked man - go away! Giano 17:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, he's not joking
It would have been nice to think that Andrew Kliman Akliman (talk · contribs)would have taken your words to heart on the talk page of WP:SHUN. I'm afraid you might never have had to deal with an editor such as he. In any event, he is defiant and unrepentant. That means that I can look forward to continued bullying and aggression - thereby suggesting the limitations of using shunning as a tactic. Watchdog07 23:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- This comment is a blatant violation of WP:BLP--the phrase "bullying and aggression" implies intent, and thereby attacks a living person (me). I ask that Giano remove it immediately. I realize that it isn't your comment, Giano, but I would prefer not to mess with your talk page, even though, since it is a WP:BLP violation, WP policy allows me to remove it.
- Please also see some addition material on shunning as a form of abuse that I discuss on the WP:SHUN talk page.
- Oh, that's why you call everything you don't like a "BLP violation", however far-fetched? Because if it was one, you would be entitled to remove it? You might want to review WP:LAWYER. I caution you against touching any posts on this or other talkpages under such a flimsy pretext. Blanking or altering other people's comments on talkpages, other than your own user talk, is considered vandalism. Bishonen | talk 11:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC).
the hated infoboxes
I'm losing patience with them. Any chance of forming a lobby group to reign in these superificial lunatics? Tony 07:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Tony - have you seen User:Geogre/Templates? He has been complaining about the procrustean demand for all articles to be squeeze into ill-fitting infoboxes for ages. Perhaps the most prominent offender has been to TfD at least twice, most recently in January 2006.
- I can see the attraction of a consistent format to contain the lower-common-denominator kind of most important and uncontroversial information in a particular kind of article. However, you would expect that kind of information to appear in the lead section already. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Tony, another notable anti-box lobbyist for you is Doc glasgow. And you're into composers, check out this baby from Geogre's talkpage, offered up by Folantin. Fortunately a historical version. Bishonen | talk 10:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC).
- Fortunately indeed. Let them (boxes) burn in hell. I'm so tired of trying to explain to people that Misplaced Pages is not consistent and that it's not expected to be (WP:POINT). After my return to English Misplaced Pages, I was flabbergasted to find all the articles about World Heritage Sites "prettified" by addition of unwieldy and uninformative infoboxes. They were thrown into stubs without any regard for their size or potential image jams, as normally happens with infoboxes. Now they tell me that I can't remove them because they "have always been there". Those people don't care about facts, layout or presentation, their true idol is Misplaced Pages's imaginary consistency. --Ghirla 11:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've also written on infoboxes, but haven't organised stuff into an essay yet. The following repeats what I've said elsewhere, but my thoughts do seem to be coming together coherently now. In my opinion, they should be nothing more or less than a tabular summary of important and easily summarised points in the article - something to be scanned (similar to a tabular form of the lead section, but slightly different), while those wanting to read the article can do that and ignore the infobox. If a point is not easily summarised and is better treated by a paragraph or two, leave that point out of the infobox and refer the reader to the article or use a footnote. Also, infoboxes should only be used on articles that have enough points to be easily summarised. Short articles can be overwhelmed by infoboxes and if reading the article takes only a little more time than scanning an infobox, then the infobox should be removed and only restored if the article gets bigger. Also, infoboxes should be designed to be as specific as possible and not used generically across broad topics. Finally, infoboxes can be designed to contain numerical and similar data, but if this starts to overwhelm the infobox, then a databox should be placed further down the article in a relevant section, and linked from the main infobox. Infoboxes are difficult to do well, and easy to do badly. Carcharoth 11:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)