User talk:Arcayne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

semi-retired




Scale of justice gold.jpg This user values third opinions and occasionally provides one.

Thursday
2
October





Loading.gifArchiveLoading.gif
♦My Spellbook♦
(Or, "How I Learned to Stop Hatin' & Love All the Crazy")
Arc 001
Arc 002
Arc 003
Arc 004
Arc 005
Arc 006



mostly out all weekend

Weekly RfA Dramaz[edit]


RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 22:57, 24 September 2014 (UTC).—cyberbot I NotifyOnline













Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1[edit]

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3. I thought you might want to sign up for Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1 from 10:30-11:45 a.m. on Saturday May 1, 2010 at the UIC Student Center West.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Carnival Masks[edit]

The Nelson material (Kubrick, Inside a Film Artists Maze) cited in the new section explicitly states "Venetian carnival masks".
However, this is more an assertion about origin and usage ancient and modern that is not consistent.
Venetian masks have their ultimate origin in the Carnival of Venice which generally runs about two weeks prior to Ash Wednesday, though they are often worn at other times of the year. A few centuries later such masks became prevalent in performances of "Commedia Dell'arte". A few more centuries after that there was a precipitous decline in the celebration of the Venetian Carnival and the association of that style of mask with the Carnival season was somewhat severed. The Carnival event came back with a vengeance after it having been banned by Mussolini whose regime was toppled by the Allies in WW2.
The term "Venetian mask" and "Venetian carnival mask" are sometimes used synonymously because of their original source and restored current usage. (Books on Italian painters virtually always refer to "Venetian carnival masks".
However, as mentioned the Nelson material already cited in the new section does indeed say "Venetian carnival masks"--WickerGuy (talk) 20:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The feathered masks are one of many varieties of Venetian carnival masks. One is a subspecies of the other. If you need a citation, see this. But, effectively this is like writing about The Lion King, and stating we can say the the animals in the film generally are indigenous to Africa but we cannot say specifically that the hyenas are indigenous to Africa. WickerGuy (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The Nelson citation I gave earlier identifying the party masks generally as "Venetian carnival masks" does not in any way exclude the feathered masks worn by the women. You however want to possibly exclude them because they are feathered, and thus that raise questions for you as to whether Nelson's general description of the party masks overall includes the feathered ones or not. If you really need that citation, the same website with Venetian feathered masks also has [1] overtly providing the carnival as the historical context of Venetian masks generally and specifically this link of theirs [2] states it is a display of carnival masks and has a picture of a feathered one, one of which (the Volto) is like that worn by the women (and is specifically identified as being a mask from Eyes Wide Shut.)
Nonetheless since Nelson said nothing to exclude the feathered masks, I am unconvinced that the burden of proof lies with me!! Dolphins are mammals though aquatic (though all mammals nurse their young by definition), and ostriches and penguins are birds although they cannot fly (though all birds by definition have wings and lay eggs and are bipedal). It is well-known that certain classes of objects have a certain trait over 90% of the time but not always.WickerGuy (talk) 23:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
In your rebuttal you state 'The Nelson citation indeed identifies the masks as "Venetian masks"'. The Nelson citation at one point very specifically says "Venetian carnival masks" (page 322 in footnotes but not p. 289 if that's where you are looking)- also Nelson on p. 289 notes that Red Cloak plays simultaneously the "dual role of King of Carnival and Grand Inquisitor". You want to make a special exception for feathered ones. You haven't searched Nelson carefully enough. You didn't actually misquote him, since I assume you only looked on p. 289, but you certainly didn't review the citation with very much care!!!!
As for the mask shop, Citation 3 possibly should have been [3] which has a mask with feathers identified as being in EWS and is categorized quite specifically as a "carnival mask". A reasonably reputable Venetian store's identification of a feathered mask as "carnival" should be sufficient whether or not EWS is being used as a marketing device or not. You are also entirely mistaken about "Phantom of the Opera". The mask in my earlier (uncorrected) citation 3 listed as the "Phantom" mask is identical to the one Gerard Butler wore in the film!!!![4] (But since the novel vastly predates the film or play, I don't even see why they are obligated to be the same.)
This is your very first rebuttal to me that contains two factual errors and one poor piece of reasoning. You didn't really search Nelson carefully, your observation about the Phantom mask is just wrong, and also irrelevant since the novel of Phantom preceded the musical by many decades. I'm having an increasingly difficult time taking this at all seriously.--WickerGuy (talk) 04:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Emily Dickinson said "Hope is a thing with feathers". Hope this works.
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-11464507/stock-photo-venetian-carnival-mask.html --WickerGuy (talk) 10:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Side notes. The Venetian mask shop has two pages with a phantom mask. In one (the main page)it is white (the one I was looking at), the other is the same shape but is gold (the one you were looking at). Neither fits the description in Leroux' novel which overtly says it covers the whole face and gives no color. However, it is unlikely to be a self-serving marketing gimmick to state overtly that a specifically feathered mask is "carnival", which is the main point.
See also this travel guide and it's photo illustrating Venetian carnival [5]--WickerGuy (talk) 15:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I just checked the movie and the only ONE of the gal's masks has feathers. A few others don't have real feathers but sculpted ones. Obviously "feathered" needs to be deleted!!!
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skhpP7DqWK0 minute 3:14. It is evident only one mask has real and two more have sculpted ones. (Later Addendum: the same frame on the YouTube video is on the Unrated DVD [released in America in 2007] is 1:14:15. Out of nine women, only ONE has real feathers. As you see I have amended the text of the main article removing the adjective "feathered". The two (out of nine) masks with sculpted feathers can both be seen at 1:14:30 This parenthetical addition added at 21:01 April 8--WickerGuy (talk) 21:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC))
The last image I gave you was not from a vendor but a travel guide to Venice, and the third to last image I gave you was from a photography place showing photoes of masks, but not actually selling masks.
You keep missing three of basic points.
a) Generally all Venetian masks can be called "carnival" masks because of their historic associations, and this is well-documented.
b) Nelson identifies the masks at the party generally as "Venetian carnival masks" (in the Back Matter footnote) (and also identifies the character of Red Cloak as combining the roles of Inquisitor and "King of Carnival".)
c) You seem to want to make some special exception for the women's masks because they have feathers. (And now I check only ONE has feathers!!!!!!!!) But Venetian masks come in wide diversity of styles (with specific names such as Moretta or Medico Della Peste) some of which may or may not have feathers. (Feathers are more often on female masks especially the Columbine, which might what they are wearing except C doesn't usually cover the lips.) Why on earth are you picking out the feathered masks (now I realized only one feathered mask- Addendum: so we mean masks of the women in the ritual Added 20:04--WickerGuy (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)) as a possible exception to Nelson's general declaration that the masks at the party are Venetian carnival masks ??????
The policy on original research precludes novel synthesis to advance a position. I am not doing anything novel nor am I advancing an opinion!!
If you don't reply directly to these points, I am going to insist on appealing to a third party as an arbitrator.--WickerGuy (talk) 20:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
NEW. The one and only of the nine women in the feathered mask is the one who "chooses" Bill Harford. Perhaps this is why you, I, and the original writer remembered all the women as having feathered masks. I have both corrected the plot description to remove the word "feathered" altogether, corrected the timing of Harford seeing and "orgy" and simply extended the word "carnival masks" to everyone present which I think more or less solves our problem.--WickerGuy (talk) 21:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Templates[edit]

You are quite right. I will correct this tonight.--WickerGuy (talk) 22:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Rock on, WickerGuy. :)

Non-free image question[edit]

Hi! I've looked into your image a bit and found the relevant policy. I've posted my suggestion here. Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Mistaken identity re. Erik[edit]

Hello,

I'm writing because you seem to be involved in a feud with a wikipedia user named Erik. Various people seem to be mad at Erik; I've received two extremely confusing phone calls from a Don in the past hour. Somehow, Don and unnamed others have done some investigating (he wouldn't specify what kind) and believe that I, Erik Kraft, an actual person, am the wikipedia user Erik. Don has found my phone number and I spent 30 minutes trying to explain to him that I'm not the person he has a beef with.

Can you fill me in on what is going on? People clearly have my information already, but my email address is krrraft@gmail.com and my phone number is 773 682 9254. I want to get this sorted out as I really don't appreciate having people angry at me over mistaken identity.

Thank you,

Erik Kraft, not wikipedia user "Erik"

ANI notice[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Ban of Sugar Bear/Ibaranoff24. Thank you.— dαlus Contribs 00:26, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

North Hollywood Shootout[edit]

Some new information for you on the Talk page, it may help clear up some of the very poor 'cites' that are present. If you need to contact me outside of Wiki to verify then you can reach me at LMindham@gmail.com (Roguebear (talk) 10:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC))

Orphaned non-free image File:Adrian Paul as Duncan McLeod.jpg[edit]

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Adrian Paul as Duncan McLeod.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Bzuk (talk) 15:09, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Mary Celeste[edit]

i noticed u got into a little back and forth with a user by the name of Gibnews about the article regarding this ship. In one of his posts he mentioned his website. i was wondering if he ever emailed you that url. if so i would really like to take a look at it. if you could get back to me i would appreciate it. Melchizedekizbak (talk) 18:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th[edit]

Welcome back![edit]

Welcome back to WikiProject Anthroponymy!
Come check out our new layout.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Anthroponymy at 07:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC).

The/the Beatles[edit]

Yes folks, it's here again. Please look at this link [6] and leave your vote. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

ASOIAF[edit]

I see you've not been active lately, but are listed at Wikiproject ASOIAF. Would you be interested in helping me get the rest of the HBO Game of Thrones episodes to GA? I want to make the thing a Good Topic, but being on ArbCom severely limits the time I have to do this stuff by myself. Jclemens (talk) 22:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Reaganomics: Mis-leading Thus Unfactual Data on Reagan's wiki page[edit]

Dear Arcayne

For the record, I am a new "contributor" to wiki. Therefore, I have no idea if this is the best way for me to send you a message, but it's the only way I could find.

Also, for the record, I am not new to reading wiki pages. As an aside, I have found many errors in many wiki pages and as a result do not put much 'veracity' in any information coming from wiki as most pages I've read leave out or add mis-leading information due to bias.

The other day, I got on Ronald Reagan's wiki page and saw an error under "Reaganomics" so, I joined wiki so I could make the correction.

After I made the correction, and included proper citation, someone took out my "edit" and then, falsely, accused my factual "edit" as vandalism. Next, I re-posted the factual information via "edit" - and because I'm new here - I posted facts and in addition I posted a "talk" comment. (I didn't know how to reply to the accuser any other way, my apologies for that).

The bottom line is, I think it is very important to maintain facts. I think it's especially important to maintain facts on past US Presidents.

I will put here what wiki has that is not factually true and then prove to you what is factually true.

A) WIKI: "the unemployment rate declined from 7.1% to 5.5%, hitting annual rate highs of 9.7% (1982) and 9.6% (1983) and averaging 7.5% during Reagan's administration.[116]

That sentence if factually wrong because the link, or citation [116], is NOT a link for "annual rate highs" rather it is a link whose Title is: "Annual average unemployment rate"

  • KEYWORD in link's Title: "Average"
  • NOTICE: the words "annual high" nor "annual rate high" are NO WHERE in the title of that link.

B) Factually, according to the US Bureau Labor &Statistics, the factual, actual "annual rate high" is 10.8% (1982) and 10.4% (1983)

1) Here is my proof that the "annual rate highs" are 10.8% (1982) and 10.4% (1983)

  • i) Go to: US Bureau Labor & Statistics, Link: http://www.bls.gov/data/
  • a) Click on "Database & Tools" where you'll see "Data Retrieval Tools - Top Picks"
  • b) Under "Top Picks" Check the box "Unemployment Rate (Seasonally Adjusted) - LNS14000000"
  • c) Click "Retrieve Data"
  • d) Go To "Change Output Options"
  • e) Put in 1981 - 1983
  • f) Click "go"
  • g) You now see Title for Table:
Series ID: LNS14000000
Series Title: Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
  • h) Below the Title in g) above is the Table which shows:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1981 7.5 7.4 7.4 7.2 7.5 7.5 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.9 8.3 8.5
1982 8.6 8.9 9.0 9.3 9.4 9.6 9.8 9.8 10.1 10.4 10.8 10.8
1983 10.4 10.4 10.3 10.2 10.1 10.1 9.4 9.5 9.2 8.8 8.5 8.3

2) You can clearly see, the factual "annual rate high" is, in fact, 10.8% (1982) and 10.4% (1983).

With all due respect, if you want to keep Reagan's "annual AVERAGE" unemployment data, so as to make it appear as though Reagan's actual unemployment rate high of: 10.8% (1982), didn't exist, that's up to you ... but ... just call it what it is, "annual average." Do not incorrectly call the annual average 9.7% (1982) and 9.6% (1983) the "annual rate high" because that would be completely false and very mis-leading to readers.

The next step is up to you - you will either correctly label the data (annual average 9.7% (1982) and 9.6% (1983)), or you might put in the actual ("annual rate high 10.8% (1982) and 10.4% (1983)), or you will let the mis-leading data stay put ... it's up to you since you are in charge of that page.

Respectfully Submitted, --Keepemhonest2 (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Dispute Resolution[edit]

You may be interested in this. Peter jackson (talk) 11:10, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion for BOHICA [edit]

Information.svg An article that you have been involved in editing, BOHICA , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Cnilep (talk) 01:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Arcayne/Export Control Act guide[edit]

User:Arcayne/Export Control Act guide, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Arcayne/Export Control Act guide and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Arcayne/Export Control Act guide during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Magioladitis (talk) 13:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)