User talk:Wetman/archive1Dec2005

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

Archived 1 December 2005

Contents

"Legend states..." The West Dakota Prize[edit]

(The West Dakota Prize is awarded about bi-annually "for successfully employing the expression 'legend states' in a complete sentence". The award is automatic. Not everyone is amused.)

Re: Caernarfon castle: "A legend states that his son, later Edward II of England was born here in 1284, but there is no contemporary evidence." I don't see anyting wrong with this sentence. If there is a genuine legend that appears in multiple sources, you have the right to report it as such, as long as you explain what we know about its veracity. This is true for the same reasons we write about the Simpsons. They are elements of culture.Superm401 00:25, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
The tacit subtext of the West Dakota Prize is that "legends" have tacit subtexts. What then would be the implication, if the heir of the conqueror of Wales was said to be born at Caernarfon? That Wales was his birthright in some sense, not merely the bloodied land conquered ruthlessly by his father Edward I of England. The West Dakota Prize is automatically awarded, but the phrase "legend states" is itself a warning flag, as this example vividly demonstrates. --Wetman 20:30, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

CURRENT & NEW TALK:

Druid[edit]

On the one hand, good quote from the BM. On the other hand, its talking about many of our misperceptions (as the general public) being wrong. Which is sort of like telling Irone Age reconstructionists that Asterix is not completely accurate - its news to the general public, but not to them. Similarly the modern Druidic groups - not the meso-druids in white robes at stonehenge - are well aware of the historical reality and track historical and archaeological studies closely. So the quote lacks neutrality, in essence. --Nantonos 12:51, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

If this is a justification for suppressing the British Museum's comments on modern misperceptions of druids as "POV", then it's a classic that belongs at Talk:Druid. I shall omit the sender's name. --Wetman 19:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
I added my name; and suggested that a suitable place for the quote would be in the introduction to the article. I further explained that the quote is fine, when applied to its original subject matter; it becomes non-neutral when used to apply to a different subject matter.--Nantonos 20:59, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
That's always right! Quotes out of context are insidious. I never mean to be guilty of that. I trust to the discretion of Nantonos now to set it in its best context. --Wetman 21:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

(The Curious Reader may wish to check Druid.)

Thanks from Jahsonic[edit]

Just wanted to say thanks for your edit of Diderot's Bijoux and after having read your user page: respect for your stance on POV and NPOV. --Jahsonic 11:33, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Uh-oh. I'm a bit self-righteous on that subject...)

Wetman[edit]

You have a random "A" near your picture center top of this page. Didn't want to touch it....LOL

Hey where are you located anyway?

Scott 23:25:03, 2005-09-02 (UTC)

Can't you tell I'm a New Yorker first and an American second?. I'll swat that "A" when I find it. thanks. --Wetman 23:50, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Wetman, Roger, Copy that. New Yorker first, American second. I see what the "A" is now. Part of "A" useful directory to sources of public domain images is (ie)

Be good...Scott 02:36:16, 2005-09-03 (UTC)

Batavii[edit]

I see that you changed the Batavii from Germanic to Celtic the other day. What is your source for this? All the material that I have seen on the Batavii makes them Germanic. Please see Talk:Batavii for discussion. Rather than revert your edit I have put a dispute template on it; perhaps you have better sources than I. Your other edits to the article were very good, by the way. --Nantonos 02:49, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

(responded for a more general audience at Talk:Batavii. --Wetman 03:24, 3 September 2005 (UTC))
(thanks; responded to your response but not sure you will see it since you mentioned un-watching that page) --Nantonos 14:36, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
added some more sources, which very clearly state "Germanic" - including the Dio Cassius one that you claimed said "Celtic". I think you came across an old, bad, or inaccurate translation. Unless you produce further evidence shortly, I will edit the main article back to saying Germanic and correct the Dio Cassius quote to be an actual quote from a named translation. --Nantonos 19:18, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I was quite misinformed about the troops swimming in full armor. They were indeed Germans in Dio Cassius, book LX. Actual quotes with links are always the better way. I shall not be re-adding Batavii to my watchlist nevertheless and do not require further briefing on the subject. --Wetman 19:45, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks re: Alcionio[edit]

Wetman, thanks for the cleanup and update for this 1911 EB article. Much appreciated. I just put up what I found from the OCR scan. That final paragraph gives better context, and now the whole article is less judgemental than the original. Thanks again! User:FeanorStar7

Skull (symbolism)[edit]

The article is a meandering essay about the symbolism of the skull, reflecting a number of views that could be called unverifiable at best. I'm not certain if the NPOV tag captures that exactly, but I don't know of any better one. Either way, I don't think you should remove such a tag from an article you created yourself, especially without mentioning the removal in the edit summary. I believe that skull symbolism is a topic worthy of its own article, but I don't have the expertise to write it myself; the NPOV tag is intended to draw the attention of someone who does. However I don't need to know much about the topic to know that "The skull has no flesh or tongue yet it speaks", while neatly poetic, is nothing but POV. Have you tried Everything2? I came here from there; they are more interested in such personal explorations. Soo 09:37, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

(Where does this kind of self-confidence come from, Curious Reader? "I believe that skull symbolism is a topic worthy of its own article"— indeed! and what might we have expected if it didn't? This is one that spends its time linking Armenian, every single time it appears. Hundreds of links. The mulish patience... I should feel more charitable I suppose.)

pelekus: Labrys[edit]

Sorry Wetman, but I didn't remove mention of pelekus from the article. I only cut it from the lead, and left its discussion to the "Etymology" section, where imho it belongs. The precise relation of sagaris-labrys-pelekus-parashu would of course deserve a more detailed account, maybe best on battle-axe. regards, dab () 10:39, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Hah! Now I see it.

Serbian culture[edit]

I have expanded this article progressively since its nomination on Sunday. Thus far, I have added sections on literature, music, art, theatre and cinema with more to come over the following days. I hope to have it completed by the close of the vote but I may not. I would be grateful if you could have a look at the progress of the article thus far. Capitalistroadster 06:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Wo! Major overhauling! I went back and amended my remark and changed my vote to "Keep" as most of us have. Well done! --06:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Anonymous rant[edit]

(Text can be read at Page history. Wetman does not engage with anonymous postings, even informative and charming ones.)

VMI peer review[edit]

You've worked on the VMI article. I have posted the article Virginia Military Institute at Wikipedia:Peer review/Virginia Military Institute/archive1 and would appreciate your comments. Rillian 14:33, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

(Such a thorough review was there, I could only add my hope for A.J. Davis images.)

Thanks: Wild Hunt[edit]

Thanks for the kind words. I thought Ghost Riders in the Sky kind of made the point that the Wild Hunt theme is a commonplace of wilderness and hunter/gatherers. If you're out in a dark night, strange sounds can be pretty darn scary, whether you're a "dumb" European tribesman, a "primitive" Pacific Islander, or a "smart" American, and I thought the creepy value of "Ghost Riders" made that hit home. As for the other issue you mention.... You know, there were issues before, when he had done what Tony is doing now -- closing VfD's in, um, unusual ways. All I'll say is that he will "be bold" and be somewhat slow to listen to the preferences and opinions of others. However, he, unlike some, will listen if he is presented with unambiguous clubbing by numerous voices. I'm just fortunate that the box folks pay no attention to my articles and that I pay little attention to the category tags that get put onto my articles (with one exception: someone put the category "Dubious historical sources" on Peterborough Chronicle, and I liked to killed them). Geogre 03:16, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

That's nice to hear, that I'm not alone. For someone who has only been inside a public school to vote, Wikipedia can be a very broadening, but often bruising experience. --Wetman 04:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

BTW, it turns out that there is a description of the Wild Hunt in the Peterborough Chronicle. I found the lines and included them in the Wild Hunt article. I'm not sure they're in a great place in the article, but they do represent a first hand account and are somewhat comprehensible to Modern English readers. Geogre 02:14, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, good job! It may simply be that I've learned a lot as this article has developed, but now it looks to me like an example of what I think is exemplary Wikipedia. (Not a featured Article though!)

Voltaire and intellectual honesty[edit]

What's with the comment on Talk:Voltaire? Seems a little unjustified and pointed to me. -Seth Mahoney 21:58, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

(It was quite pointed indeed, Curious Reader, occasioned by a new "Category: Philosophy of Sexuality"— featuring Voltaire! I crossly pointed out that "Jerome spent a great deal more time thinking about human sexuality than Voltaire, and wrote about virginity and fornication at much greater length. Needless to say, Saint Jerome is not to be found in the category Philosophy of sexuality." Disingenuously, I invited this editor to enter Jerome in the new category and defend the action at Talk:Jerome. Indeed (I've just checked) Jerome has not been included in such a category. My verdict: Failure of nerve combined with intellectual dishonesty. )
Yes, I'm quite aware of what you said. Remember, I'm responding to your post on Talk:Voltaire, so there's no need for a recap, but thanks. I didn't add Jerome because I'm not familiar enough with his writings to justify such an addition. I am, however, familiar with Voltaire, so I made that addition. My adding Jerome to Category:Philosophy of sexuality would thus run counter the spirit of intellectual honesty. I don't know what your deal is, but in this case you're just being preposterous. -Seth Mahoney 22:44, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
The argument from incompetence is always acceptable: I resort to it often myself. --Wetman 00:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

(I'm confident that you got the point, Curious Reader. Those nuns! They teach them to despise Voltaire first, then let them read selections of Candide.)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for the kind words about Italian Wars and War of the League of Cambrai. The latter has been my pet project for several months, and in the course of researching it, I naturally came across material for the former. I'll try to add some more material in the near future - unfortunately, the supporting articles (such as Habsburg-Valois Wars and League of Cognac) are in even worse shape than the main one. Kirill Lokshin 22:55, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Quite true: I just looked. Keep picturing your cleaned-up Italian Wars article having many paragraphs with a "Main article:..." heading. It helps you keep themes and episodes and personalities clear in the trunk article that you're building. --Wetman 00:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Eucharis (mythology)[edit]

  • Thanks for the additions. I'd assumed Fénelon had a mythological source for the character - helps to explain why she's more prevalent in French. Dlyons493 16:48, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

West Dakota Prize[edit]

I'm really confused, does the wording in Swains Island need changing? The article isn't great now but I didn't think it was that bad. Falphin 00:33, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

No serious harm intended. The prizes are won by every article employing the phrase, willy-nilly. --00:57, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

West Dakota Prize (thanks)[edit]

Thanks for compiling the West Dakota Prize. I had the Cathedral of Learning article on my watchlist, but hadn't looked at it very closely. I moved two paragraphs with uncited anecdotes to the Talk page, and requested that references be provided. Thanks! -- Creidieki 02:15, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Any sentence with the words "legend states" in it bears scrutinizing. --Wetman 08:06, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Have just tuned in, it's amazing the internet seems to work very efficiently here too, but alas I do not seem to be the first of my race to have discovered North-North America, so I won't be claiming it for Italian sovereignty. It seems the Irish arrived first and did that. Just wanted to say thanks for your support in various places over the last few days. Why do things only hot up when one is away? Thanks a lot Giano | talk 06:43, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Mars Bar Party WDP[edit]

I see your point, but since the page is stating the content of a common urban legend I think it stands. :) Vashti 19:00, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

All articles with "Legend" or its equivalent in their titles are automatically disqualified. --Wetman 19:33, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for the kind words on my Anatomy of Criticism overhaul. I'm new to editing Wiki, but I've loved Frye's Anatomy (of Criticism that is!) since I read it 8 years ago, and it seemed like the Wiki article needed an update. I need to learn more, but it seems like a lot of fun for a good cause. --JECompton 05:49, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I can reach out and put my hand on my copy right here. Your editing is most perceptive: the Wikipedians won't like it a bit! Be prepared, and don't take it all too seriously. --Wetman 06:23, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

No Archive.org?[edit]

Regarding your removal of my change of link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unam_sanctam&curid=482984&diff=23025749&oldid=23025470 Is there a policy or other reason you removed the link to the the Internet Archive's copy of the dead page? I thought it would be at least as useful to have that, as to have nothing. Thanks! —Felix the Cassowary (ɑe hɪː jɐ) 08:30, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Click on the link and see why I removed it. If I could have fixed it, I would have done so, you may be sure. --Wetman 08:35, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
I think I’m confused. The original link that was there—[1]—was broken. I replaced it with a link to [2] (thanks to the Internet Archive), which you deleted. The link I put in appears to be fine. Can you actually not see the content at the second link? Is the content there false? Or did you just happen along the page before I fixed it, and then went to edit it after I’d done so, so you never realised I’d fixed it in the first place? —Felix the Cassowary (ɑe hɪː jɐ) 10:38, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
The link (2) in your post works fine, and would be an essential feature at Unam Sanctam. Was I editing a version that wasn't current? No matter now: let me not interfere, and leave it to you to fix. Thanks. --Wetman 19:35, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
We made the changes at almost the same time, so probably you happened across it before I'd changed it, then went in to edit it, and deleted my edit without realising the link had changed. No matter, I put the good link back in. All's well that ends well! (If you do come across a broken link, the easiest way to heal it is by visiting the Internet Archive (archive.org) and popping the address into the search field.) —Felix the Cassowary (ɑe hɪː jɐ) 06:58, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Oh, now that's a good thing to know about. Sorry about the bollux. --Wetman 07:41, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

User:Leonard G. RfA[edit]

Care to comment? Thanks, Leonard G. 15:51, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Looks like I need your support on this one (I understand that you are an administrator). The thing seems to be getting out of hand. All I need is a one button revert and I seemed to have stirred up a hornet's nest. Leonard G. 03:14, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

In fact, situations like this are an excellent reason why I am not an Administrator. All I do here is add text and images and try to see that information is not subverted. A "one-button revert" seems like an encouragement to further ill behavior, of which there is already so much. So I must say, with M. de Valmont, "It's beyond my control." --Wetman 03:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Morocco[edit]

Hi Wetman. Can you please have a look at Talk:Morocco? The dispute about the map is getting hot one more time. This time at the bottom of the article. Cheers -- Svest 23:31, September 12, 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™

I think we're all quite aware of the disputed situation, and agree that the map should be tinted in a way that shows the conflicting claims. No one wants to take sides, but it seems fruitless to post there. --Wetman 00:05, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


Anthony Blunt[edit]

In case you are wondering what has happened to Sicilian Baroque, I finally surrendered my pride and ordered a copy of Blunt's book (which is taking seemingly months to arrive) I had hoped to do the page without it, but that lack of authorative references has mad the job impossible. I've never read it, and a lot of Sicilian scholars felt he made peculiar to Sicily what was actually happening largely elsewhere anyway. Well we shall see, I just wondered if you had the book, and what your thoughts are on it. Hope all well, I think you a little modest about your own input above by the way - you do add a good dollop of common sense about the place too! Regards Giano | talk 07:22, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't have it, and merely looked at it at someone else's house over a weekend decades ago, not knowing any of the buildings at first hand. But you'll be a good judge of whether Blunt put his finger on what's truly Sicilian about Sicilian Baroque. The patron had a lot of input in the 17th century; will it have been the patron who bought engravings during trips to Rome. Or were there printsellers in Palermo? Or did the architects themselves move about between Sicily and Naples? I'd have thought it was a situation comparable to M. Brettingham or James Paine. Won't the most Sicilian flourishes be in the details, produced by craftsmen who never strayed far from their quarry connections? "Foreign stone" was the doubtful expression of a mason unwilling to be picked up and moved about fifteen miles between gardens— in the 20th century and the Eastern US. I"m just finishing a dish of tortellini in brodo—not my tortellini, but my brodo... and the brodo is brilliant! I feel quite luxurious. --Wetman 08:08, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
From my own cuisine: try the brodo with gnocchi, it marries the flavour better than with pasta. Giano | talk 10:47, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Poitiers (1356) external link[edit]

I recently listed an external article I found on the Talk page of Battle of Poitiers (1356) and am looking for comments as to its worthiness to be an external link. As you have edited that page, I was hoping you would comment. Would you? 204.126.127.253 14:40, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

A link to a serious article is always welcome. Click on the page title above to go to the page, click on "Edit this page", and see the simple html I used to enter the link you found. And log in, so people can correspond with you! --Wetman 20:31, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

San Francisco pictures (Leonard G.)[edit]

Hello and greetings:

I was reviewing my talk page and you had mentioned that there were San Francisco articles needing pictures. (I recently added some from the Tea Garden in Moon bridge, Step-stone bridge and Golden Gate Park (the north windmill image). As I have elected to quit chasing vandals, and have brought many of the articles that I work on up to a reasonable standard I now have more time for creative pursuits. I am open to suggestions, just post them (either pictures specifically or needy articles) on my User Talk:Leonard G. page (make a new entry "Image requests"). I will be doing some shorter instate road trips and will be collecting some more California images so let me know what you think is needed outside of the nine-county greater SF Bay Area. Also, let me know what and where you might also contribute - it might inspire me to write a new article. Thanks, and best wishes, Leonard G. 01:40, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

A very pleasant set of possibilities. I'll list photo oppportunities at your talk page, just so they're not missed. As for my edits, check User contributions, hit on the articles you know something about. fix redlinks with new articles, even a single stubby paragraph. The vandalism can get you down. --Wetman 02:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

THD[edit]

Why did you revert Total harmonic distortion? — Omegatron 00:01, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

I reverted the edit by anonymous User:129.97.174.43, all of whose other 6-7 August 2005 edits were vandalism. --Wetman 02:59, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
I had already reverted it, and you reverted back to his version.  :-) — Omegatron 05:09, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
We do try not to let stuff like that happen! --Wetman 06:57, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


Books[edit]

As happens so often when one waits ages for some thing, both arrived together in the same post this morning. Houses of the Gentry is great, have only glanced at it, but I can see I shall refer to it often, and dip in frequently. Have you ever seen "The perfect English Country House" by Candid Lycett Green, it reminds me of that, each page is a delight to look at, except H of G is more exercising to the brain.

Sicilian Baroque however, is a complete (so far) dissapointmen. My fault probably, as it was very expensive indeed, for a tatty old second hand copy, I was expecting a big glossy. Its a 100 odd pages of text with a collection of B/A fotos at the back. That I can cope with, the problem is what he regards as Baroque I don't. He shows (what I, and the English, call Palladian revival as Sicilian baroque. Worst of all is Villa Villarosa which is so neoclassical it's not true. He also makes great play on the external staircases leading to the piano nobile. but they were happening elsewhere, bigger and better, long before they came here. I suppose the answer is to read the book cover to cover before passing judgement. But it will be a while before Sic Bar graces FA. Talking of grace have you seen this [3]an attempt to rid the place of that template on the biographies. Right off for a six hour read - perhaps first impressions are unfair. Regards Giano | talk 12:39, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

...I read such books a bit the way I enjoy reading M. F. K. Fisher, sitting in the kitchen with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich...
Quite! Finished the book, it improved on reading - a little. Have decided to write the article my way, my views, then de-POV and find some references when it's finished, a little unconventional, but at least it will be finished. Giano | talk 06:29, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Have a Grackle![edit]

This grackle has spotted you and is very pleased with your work!

For having a thought provoking user page, filled with valuable instructions and examples that obviously show in the quality of your edits, I award you this Great-tailed Grackle! Keep up the good work! Unfocused 03:58, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

(Wetman responds): Wh-why I hardly know what to say. First, I want to thank my mom and dad... um, and God... ...

Mâle[edit]

Hi! You created this article about the village and castle near Bruges. Is there a reason why you used a circumflex in the name? In Dutch, the village (and the castle) is called simply "Male", so I think "Male, Belgium" would be better. Markussep 10:24, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

I think you're right. I was under the impression there was a missing s: Masle. But I'm mistaken. --Wetman 13:44, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
I just moved it. BTW your text looks a lot like the text in your first link [4], did you write that too? Markussep 21:00, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
If you think the information is too similar, just make something up! --Wetman 21:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Race, milieu, and moment[edit]

I've written a response to your proposal to merge Race, milieu, and moment with Hippolyte Taine at Talk:Race, milieu, and moment. I'd be grateful if you would take a look at what I've said there. Thanks. Chick Bowen 14:01, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

okay, and I added a heading Main article: Race, milieu, and moment. Without it, the article will never be seen under that covert title. --Wetman 14:50, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for that, and thanks also for spurring me to expand this article, which needed to be a fuller account. Since it's much longer now, I've removed the merge tag; I hope you don't mind (if you still think it should be merged, feel free to put it back or add it to a particular section). Thanks. Chick Bowen 18:09, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Chick, I made a few tweaks, returning once more to the phrase in French (no accent in moment) and embedding the table of contents in the text using {{TOCleft}}. I can't recall the title of the Wikipedia article on post-modern (rather than modern) criticism that should be mentioned: understanding the work by embedding it in its context— but see Contextualism. --Wetman 21:12, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
New historicism? I debated whether to include NH under "Influences"--maybe it should be there. Your tweaks are good. Chick Bowen 00:08, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Aye aye! Helping me over my Senior Moment there... Yes, indeed it should! Inescapable. But the New Historicism article is very shaky: why not work on them in tandem? --Wetman 01:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Yeesh--you're quite right. I'd never read it before. I'll try to do a few things with it tonight. Maybe it should be reordered, with an expanded theoretical justification up front? Certainly Foucault's name should appear earlier. I've also been meaning to work on the Taine article, which was taken from Britannica 1911 but is still oddly POV. It would be good just to tone it down a little bit. Chick Bowen 17:25, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Cour d'honneur[edit]

Nice expansion there, I seem to be creating a lot of stubby pages lately all in an attempt to reduce the size of Sic bar. That is coming along nicely now, just one problem - as I'm going it alone, as the Wiki Baroque expert could you just keep an eye on it to make sure I don't make any huge serious factual errors. I have made one hinting sort of statement about Roccoco being an influence on the later accomplished architects - do you think that's correct? Old Mr Blunt is coming in very useful now I've read it, I don't agree with it all, but he's quite useful for quoting. I'm unhappy with the whole chronology of the page, and order of explanation, but I think I'll finish writing it, and then probably re-write - its just a matter of thoughts and ideas on paper at the moment. Its also a problem trying to explain the whole joie de vivre of the subject and still be encyclopedic and NPOV - also if it ever went to FA they would hate the long captions on the pictures, but I think its the best way of explaining what's going on. I'd like some palazzo picture, I've asked a couple of owners but they're a funny lot about having their houses on the internet - the stately home business has not yet properly arrived! Corps de logis is looking a bit short too, should it be Corps de Logis? Regards Giano | talk 16:39, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

  • What is it they say about great minds [5] Giano | talk 16:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Elite (disambiguation)[edit]

Wetman,

Can you explain your reason for deleting Elite Model Management from the Elite (disambiguation) page? I didn't put it there, but I figured it belonged. It is usually just referred to as "Elite". Thanks. SDC 01:22, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Normal: for the same reason Elite Meat Market isn't there either. Elite (disambiguation) disambiguates "Elite". It doesn't even disambiguate Elitism: perhaps it should. It's not a list of all Wikipedia pages that include the word "elite", after all, though perhaps the typeface point size Elite should be mentioned, don't you think? . "L33t" shouldn't really be there either, perhaps. --Wetman 02:55, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

On the topic of OwlBoy[edit]

Hi, I see you marked my first entry OwlBoy as spam. At first I thought it was an automated system doing it due to all my external links to images and it was my first entry. Then I noticed in the history it was marked this way by another user. I am posting this here mainly to prove I am not some spam bot or something, and to ask what "db|nn-spam" is I can't seem to find a definition of what that stands for. My entry is real, and true. And I would appreciate if it was not marked as spam, or deleted.

I also hope it was not marked this way because you thought it was not worthy of the wiki or something.

I am a big contributor to http://www.wowwiki.com a World of Warcraft wiki, and this is my first experience on the 'real' wiki, and so far it's not a good one.

OwlBoy 10:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

As the notice says, "If you disagree with its speedy deletion, please explain why on its talk page or at Wikipedia:Speedy deletions." There's nothing final about the notice. If you think the entry is a real encyclopedia entry, improve it and make a note at its talk page. --Wetman 10:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
I am currently improving it. I sadly have a bad habit of submitting every little edit and addition I do. So you marked it as spam before it had much entered. I will add more to the talk page, and try to flesh out the entry a bit more. Also, what does 'nn-spam' mean, I did a google search and a wikipedia search, and I can't find a definition. -OwlBoy 11:05, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Never mind, I see, this ain't how the wiki works. Its not for all kinds of information, of descriptions and definitions, but for things of importance. It was deleted after I finished adding information, and I guess it will stay that way. I do understand why, I just did not think about that before I entered something that felt important to me. OwlBoy 11:24, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Villanovan culture[edit]

Thanks for your recent edits of the Villanovan culture article. You added more than twice the amount that was on the page already, and all with high quality! Nixdorf 21:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Whew! You couldn't tell that I was working at the very limits of my competence? I was very cautious, to tell the truth. So do vet what I added with a critical eye. --Wetman 22:49, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Aesop[edit]

i don't claim to be an expert in this field, but from what i gather, if the "references to him in several Greek works" and the mention of him by Herodotus don't count as "records" to you, i don't know what does. Furthermore, your use of the word "tradition" is rather awkward. Anyway i don't want to start an edit war so i would most likely get a third party to review this. --Plastictv 12:51, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

The tradition of an "Aesop" was certainly thoroughly embedded. I think a third party might be best. Anyone who has edited a good deal in the area of Greek literature would be just fine. --Wetman 13:03, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Forgive me for intruding--I was on this page to comment on another matter below--but I couldn't help noticing this debate. I think the issue here is that "records" usually means references from someone's own lifetime, as opposed to references by much later writers (thus we have no records that Homer was blind, or, for that matter, that he existed). Wetman's use of the word "tradition," though it may be awkward, is historically accurate--all of the records we have are of later writers responding to something that was handed down to them through oral sources or written sources that have been lost. The accepted scholarly term for direct records of someone's life is "life records"--for Aesop, there aren't any, and I think that could be said in his article without POV. I hope this is helpful. Chick Bowen 19:15, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi, i have gotten Angr to review the article, and he has agreed with your edit. i'm convinced. i do apologize sincerely for sounding angry in the previous message, and reverting your changes harshly. And thanks Chick Bowen for chipping in. :) --Plastictv 11:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Let me say, it shows courage and strength of character to permit yourself to be convinced. You see, Homer, who is a shadowy figure too, has a distinct body of work, but the "Aesop" figure is just a magnet that attracts all kinds of brief moralizing animal fables, which aren't the same in the various collections: Aesopica. The Greek Anthology of poems is more stable, actually, and that represents many authors. I'm glad if all's well between us. --Wetman 12:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC).

Belvedere[edit]

Hello there Wetman, I read your comment that you left about the Belvedere (palace) in Vienna. I agree with you, that "Schloss Belvedere" would be a better name, this "Belvedere (palace)" with the bracket looks ackward. The german language article certainly is put at "Schloss Belvedere". Palace and Schloss are not really always the same either, true. However, I checked on the homepage of the Österreichische Galerie, take a look here if you want [6]. Also try a google search... again, I am open for suggestions, looking forward to your thoughts. with kind regards... GryffindorFlag of Austria (state).svg 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

"Schloss Belvedere" also has the virtue of ignoring any issues of "it's a villa" (it started as one) "it's a palace" (any grand residence of Maria Theresa is a palace). But "Belvedere Palace" has a false ring to it, as "Belvedere Palais" would have, though the Österreichisches Galerie Belvedere employs "Belvedere Palace" in passing at their website, ostensibly to please us. In their German version, however, should you want to rent part of it for your dream wedding, it's "Das Traumschloss für Ihre Traumhochzeit!" --Wetman 23:28, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Sicilian octave[edit]

Wetman, your proposal to merge Sicilian octave, like your proposal to merge Race, milieu, and moment, is perfectly rational and I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree based on academic grounds. However, I thought it might be helpful if I gave a rationale for what I'm doing with the WikiProject Missing articles, since, based on what I've seen of you, I'd actually expect you to be sympathetic. Many of the literary terms on the Wikiproject hotlists are ones that would be more likely to be encountered in an older piece of literature. Thus, yes, they won't come up very often. But when they do, I want someone to be able to find them in Wikipedia. It seems to me that one of Wikipedia's strengths is that you can look up anything at all--obscure South Asian politicians and the like--and get a concise account. So I don't expect that either of those articles (nor the ones I will continue to add through the Wikiproject) will be read often, but I hope that when they're needed they will be to the point. I think that the modern student, reading some dingy tome in her library carrel, probably has Wikipedia open on her laptop, and will turn there for help when she finds something she doesn't recognize. I'd like us to be there for her. Thanks. Chick Bowen 18:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with every single point you make. In general, I think the project of ensuring that all entries in Nuttall's or Britannica are represented at Wikipedia too, is a sensible one. But if, fresh from Nuttall's, she enters "Sicilian octave" here, and an automatic redirect lands her at Ottava rima, where she finds Sicilian octave mentioned with its name bolded at first appearance up near the front, and the two terms compared and contrasted—then she will be all the better for having the richer context, which makes an encyclopedia more interesting than a dictionary. Chick, it's clear you grasp the essentials of creating context, though many list-makers do not. I take it for an axiom, that not all terms need to be represented under their own separate heading though entering any encyclopedia term, even from an antique one, should produce better-than-satisfactory results. --Wetman 22:55, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
This is very sound in general, and I'll bear it in mind for future articles. In this particular instance, I think the obscurity of the subject cuts both ways, since it would be misleading to make Sicilian octave too important a part of the Ottava rima article--Ottava rima is a major rhyme scheme used by two of the most important poets in literary history (Boccaccio and Byron), while the Sicilian octave was used primarily by anonymous oral poets of southern Italy before the 15th century--the example I have in the article is the only major literary example. There's also a question (perhaps pedantic) of accuracy--the two forms, though superficially very similar, are not historically related.
However, you're right about context, and I offer a compromise. I note (to my horror!) that there's no entry for strambotto, which really is the historical parent for Sicilian octave. What if I create one and then merge S.o. into it, along with a discussion of the Tuscan form? Chick Bowen 01:21, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
My error: if they're not related, then they don't belong together. Maybe just a link at each to the unrelated other format, so easily confused yada yada yada... But then, according to you— for I'm out of my depth here as you can tell— perhaps my strictures might equally apply to Strambotto and Sicilian octave. Take my advice cum grano salis needless to say. --Wetman 02:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Oh, no need for humility. They're structurally related but not historically related. . . I'll try to make all this clearer, at any rate. Chick Bowen 03:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


Domenico de' Rossi[edit]

Could you be very kind and look at this link, the more I think about it the more certain I am, I may have written about the wrong man - there seem now to be several, it's the engraving one I want! Do any of your books shed more info than mine (which is very little). Thanks. Regards. Giano | talk 06:30, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, quite right. The Domenico de' Rossi who interests you, quite rightly, for Sic. Bar. is the printseller of Rome. I added some details. --Wetman 07:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Brilliant, I knew you would know the answer, this is the problem of having books in two separate countries, I never have the right one's to hand. I've just knocked this off in a hurry Giuseppe Venanzio Marvuglia. I have to go out now for the rest of the day - so if you are up to a copy edit..........it's quite interesting,...honestly...I promise. Giano | talk 08:07, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Very interesting indeed. My very first thought was one of Wren's city churches in London. It could not be more different to the church of S. Filippo Neri (which Blunt says is his only church - told you the man was no good) That has a barrel vault too, but gilded there, and huge great polished marble columns with corinthian capitals etc. - trompe l'oeuille (I can never spell that) theatre boxes etc. I've just dug out "World Architecture" no interiors of the city churches, but St. Paul's has those same double pilasters between the arches. Also don't laugh have you seen (I think its Hawksmoor's not Vanbrugh's) library at Blenheim. Similar pilasters between the arched windows, same miniature clerestory above a similar entablature. What do you think of the images on Sic Bar, I found them orphaned on Commons - it was like Christmas! I shall think about this all afternoon, I'm taken with the Blenheim idea so look forward to hearing your views. My view we are still in Baroque, but English. But the man is supposed to be Neoclassical by then. However. I've finished my sandwich so must return to remunerated employment.Nice edits by the way thanks. Giano | talk 12:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I've just been rereading the Blunt's Sic Bar. on Marvuglia: he liked to mix Neoclassical and Palladian. and on his Villa Belmonte (1801 - 06) Palladian portico (reminiscent).  !801 - 6 was in a moment of great anglophilia on Palermo as Ferd IV was in Palermo under protection of the British; and the Principe di Belmonte was very pro British. So perhaps the answer in there.
That still does not explain mixture of Baroque and Palladianism so late. However, in the picture section it gives Belmonte as built c.1780. 1780 looks the more probable date to me, from the photos I would have said it was more Palladian than anything else, in fact I see no neo classicism, a tiny piece of baroque, (trophy over the main entrance), but the unbroken pediments alternate on the piano nobile between triangular and curved. However it is a bombed shell so one can't be sure.
Blunt seems to attach great importance to Marvuglia. as he gives him a good biography section and lots of fotos. The monastery of S. Martino delle Scale has wings built between 1762 and 74, which are far more palladian than baroque, these are some of the fotos I said to you about when I first saw the book. The inside is "Pompeian", whatever to me there looks to be precious little Baroque there. Perhaps I'm not fully understanding the final days of Baroque, because I'm sure losing the plot here. actually I remember as a child going to somwhee called Kloster Ettal (my spelling) in Bavaria, which looked very similar, and had a large clearly baroque church at it's centre, perhaps I am missing something! Can you explain? Giano | talk 07:24, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
John Woolfe and James Gandon (Chambers' pupil, who worked in Dublin after 1781), produced continuations of Vitruvius Britannicus in a vol. IV (1767) and V (1771), showing work by the likes of Burlington, Kent, Isaac Ware, John Wood, Sir William Chambers, Robert Adam and James Paine. (Oh look, Giano! a complete set is now only $42,500!) Chambers' (was it?) library at Chatsworth might well be represented there in an elevation (I can't locate my Howard Colvin). Would one of Maravuglia's Anglophil patrons have had a copy?
Style designations don't always add understanding. German writers more than English ones distinguish a Spätbarock— is it a chastened classicicizing Baroque: Perrault's Louvre, Luigi Vanvitelli, Frederick the Great's Berlin— or Johann Conrad Schlaun at Münster—as opposed to the earlier organic/sculptural "Free Baroque": Borromini and Sicily? But interiors of Louis XIV's Versailles of the 1670s are Late Baroque in tone. Heinrich Kreisel's 3-vol German furniture history put sculptural Hochbarock in vol I and architecturalizing Spätbarock (and Rococo) in vol II.
Now, your Sic. Bar. seems to develop independently out of High Baroque "movemented" facades, sculptural decor, splintering, bursting and interpenetrating architectural elements etc, and to ignore the later, academic turn that mainland Baroque took: i.e. Vanvitelli's Caserta! So then Maravuglia is reacting against the local freewheeling "licenciousness": is her consciously introducing an academic "Caserta" style into what seems a provincial atmosphere? Of course I don't have a clue. But if the fit is awkward, it's the label that has to go: there's one Late Baroque at Stupenigi and its garden layout, but then there's Asam's Assumption (1717-25)! of which my whole-hearted enjoyment is utterly wicked, you may imagine: some fool said "sculpture is frozen music—here is flash-frozen opera seria! Style is rarely fully in control of buildings, though: when it is, they get illustrated in art books! --Wetman 10:28, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • You make me nervous when you say "I don't have a clue" as I suspect you do. Well I've learn a lot researching this. I am ashamed to say, I has always assumed the Quattro Canti in Palermo was post quake Baroque, I hadn't realise it came before. Mr. Lasso is next on my list of sub pages, when I've finished them all properly (please feel fee to add what you like to any of it, Iv put the sub pages in the main space in the hope someone will add their Granny's house or something) when I've finished them I'm going to re-write the whole Sic Bar page from an architects criminological perspective. Blunts three phases are nice and clean in theory, but in practice it all overlaps. I think this is going to run to whole "Category:Sicilian Baroque" - I'm not joking. I think you may be called on rather a lot, especially towards the end. Do you think one could say "High Sicilian Baroque" was a fusion of Baroque and Rococo. In the meantime - I'll fight the urge to buy Vitruvius Britannicus the complete set, and pay the children's school fees instead! I wonder which is the best investment for ME. I see you have yet to add your name to the history list of James Gandon Giano | talk 18:34, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Edict of Nantes[edit]

Thanks for the info re the cleanup tag on Edict of Nantes. For additional information, I added the cleanup tag as the page had been added to Wikipedia:Cleanup (with a comment Edict of Nantes: Needs to be Wiki-fied, can't find the code to tag it as such. Still a bit new at massive editing. --(Why does it show my IP, shouldn't it just say, "Anonymous"?) 17:25, 3 October 2005), the edit was by 67.52.120.87 at 01:25, 4 October 2005. Andreww 09:00, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Quadrumana[edit]

You added the line:

The attempted division of "Quadrumana" from "Bimana" form a stage in the long campaign to find a secure way of distinguishing Homo sapiens from the rest of the great apes, a distinction that was theologically essential.

What evidence do you have for this claim? I am inclined to agree with you, but it would be useful to indicate an authority for this claim. In particular, was Blumenbach theologically motivated, or was his division merely convenient on theological grounds? Gdr 13:08, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

It's an important thread in the history of ideas, being debated between Owen and Huxley in 1861, still lively today. Read Carter Blake in Edinburgh Review, 1863: [7], occasioned by Thomas Henry Huxley's Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature that year. I haven't read Darwin's Descent of Man though I should have at my age, I know: there will be grist for your mill there too.
If you'll Google "Quadrumana distinction" as I have done, you'll find some good quotes for the article along this line, which is essential to discussing the motivation for "Quadrumana". Who has written specifically on this subject more recently? Stephen Jay Gould touched on it in The Mismeasure of Man and in several of his long series of "Reflections" for Natural History Magazine I recall. Should it be propped up with some references do you think? You give the impression that it's a bit of a bolt from the blue for you. The theology of it is not to be laid at Blumenbach's door but is caught up in the semi-angelic nature of Man's position in the Great Chain of Being— "A being darkly wise, and rudely great" as Pope said. The definition of language keeps shifting in modern times, so that chimpanzees continue to be on their proper side of the fence. --Wetman 13:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC).

The long history of taxonomical buttressing of man's special place in nature is familiar to me (I wrote the section in the hominoid article that deals with his demotion from this pinnacle), but the location of your comment suggested to me that you were imputing a primarily theological motivation to Blumenbach, which seemed slightly anachronistic to me. I will rephrase to try to make this clearer. Gdr 14:43, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Hominoid is merely a redirect to Ape, where I see a gloss on the usage "ape" and a few lines of "Cultural aspects" that don't address this issue in the least. I do hope that intellectual curiosity was the motivation for the query, not merely a prelude to justify suppressing the word "theological", which does lie at the heart of the matter; nevertheless I have amended the text to read "a distinction that was culturally essential." The real story of "Quadrumana"—not yet addressed— lies not in the fact that it's "an obsolete division of the primates" but precisely in the debate about this human/ape distinction, which is what motivated such mediocre science. --Wetman 15:39, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Section 5 of ape is mine. There are of course two stories: the scientific/taxonomic story, and the religious/cultural story. Neither is the "real" story by itself, we need both. Gdr 16:14, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

That's outstandingly clear, Gdr, covering the gradual demotion of humans purely from the accumulating science. I added the two references, from 1861 and 1863, to exhibit how what had been good science of the 1770s was being used to bolster human uniqueness in the 1860s— which I believe is the major thrust of "Quadrumana" in the history of ideas. I put our conversation on the Talk page there, because I think it's generally useful. --Wetman 16:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Anne Boleyn and the card queen[edit]

File:Annbolen.JPG
Missing captions

Hey, I was going through the history of Anne Boleyn article and found that you had added a caption for this image (on May 21, 2004), saying the headgear was the inspiration for the picture of the queen on a deck of playing cards. The caption was later modified by anon user on July 24, 2004. The image and caption was then removed (probably vandalism) on July 9, 2005. When it was put back in a different section, the caption was lost. I'm not sure whether to put back the caption on the same image. Can you add the info in the article somewhere. Jay 14:37, 7 October 2005 (UTC)


Alessandro Galilei[edit]

Nice page Wetman. I didn't know he had been to England. Its also good to see how many architects are now blue instead if red. I must revamp Giacomo Leoni, I was still very new when I did him, he deserves better! The monster is still growing, and I'm still unhappy with it, once all the info is there it can all be pruned and prioritised - I hope. Giano | talk 08:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Good edits at Sic Bar, I can't quite pinpoint what I feel is wrong with it. I think the evolved style needs to be more clearly defined. My problem is the more I read the more I wonder if there was an evolved better phase (as Prof. Blunt) states, not just some architects being more talented than others - so we are getting dangerously near the realms of own research. There is just so little material out there, I bought a book the other day in German (by the time I had deciphered it with my "school boy German" I found it was just rehashed Blunt, this seems to happen time and time again. I've a short section on interiors to write, then I think a big hard edit - or perhaps just leave it long and see if anyone chops it up - what do you think? At least no one can call it superficial! Giano | talk 16:00, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
"Evolved" is the problem: Darwinianist art history. Fiske Kimball could write of The Evolution of the Rococo in France. Blunt (b. 1907) is among the "Darwinian" generation seeing growth, flowering, decadence of a style that's evolving like a biological species, then going to seed like an individual plant. Architectural history however is better sensed as a series of events. At each event— which may be one episode in a string of events on a site, like the "campaigns" of cathedral building— certain constraints define the horizon of what is possible. Style is merely one of the constraints (funds, social or religious programs, personal and local prejudices all play roles in defining and limiting the Possible): style may not be equally understood or shared among patron, designer, craftsman, and is never wholly in control of the event, anyway. There is no "evolution" that is progressing between events, though there may be many new experiences that will come to bear on the next event: a suite of engravings perhaps, a Grand Tour, an imported fountain, a nearby architectural event. Like Thomas Kuhn's model of "progress" in sciences, some architectural events are revolutionary: they take a generation to "sink in" to local vocabulary. From the 1690s but especially in the C18, engravings start to accelerate the process, then photographs and an architectural press lead to the modern virtual-reality situation. Before engravings, apprenticeships were formative, both those of designers and of craftsmen. Patrons too experience a cultural apprenticeship: in creating the event, not all patrons lag behind. These axioms help me: perhaps they'll be useful to you too. --Wetman 16:58, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject: Fairy Tales[edit]

Hi, I don't know if you noticed but I've started to work on several fairy tale articles lately. I'm trying to standardize the general outline of each article as much as possible but I've still got a long road ahead. Currently I'm editing List of fairy tales (which will probably get a *major* overhaul in the near future), the most well known Grimm fairy tales and some of Perrault's. I'm striving to include as much foreign material as possible, including African, Russian or Eastern fairy tales.

Therefore I thought it might be interesting to start a Wikiproject on the topic. As it stands, way too many articles are still in need of clean-up (or not written at all). You're probably too busy to really deal with this right now (or just find it too trivial), but tell me what you think about it? Any advice is welcome. --Steerpike 23:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Every tale is a thing in itself, not simply an example of a pattern, though we may preceive one— or several. A standardized general outline sounds like something to force every tale into. Those of us from less authoritarian cultural levels fail to see what virtue might be intrinsic in uniformity. So, will a lot of information have to be discarded, I'm wondering? Will there be a taxobox with information reduced to a schema? The page history and talk at Rapunzel will show you why I'm dubious. --Wetman 05:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Those of us from less authoritarian cultural levels? Eh, it's not like I want to force every fairy tale into a table. I was just talking about general outline really. A text structured with an intro, plot synopsis, origins and analysis would already be a good starting point. I'm happy to include as much info as possible, but like I said, most articles right now are one long page of running text. And I did read the talk page of Rapunzel (how else do you think I wound up on *this* page ;)) and I see the problem concerning analysis, but as the article stands, most problems have been cleared up no? Besides, I thought the interpretation of Rapunzel you wrote *was* in fact the one that is generally accepted (as in Sleeping Beauty) (or maybe somebody else wrote it, but I noticed you reverted deletion a couple of times). Anyway, whether or not the texts are standardized to conform to one particular lay-out isn't nearly as important to me as people collaborating to create high quality articles on fairy tales. I will try and keep working on this. Thank you for your input. --Steerpike 12:02, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Callimachus (sculptor)[edit]

Twaddle indeed, W. I just shoved the whole thing on in there; I would refine it but I have a midterm to write. Feel free. . . Chick Bowen 12:28, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Much better with the Vitruvius quote! Check my added details! --Wetman 12:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Excellent! Did we have an edit conflict this morning? I had no idea of course—sorry about that. It's looking pretty good: I took out the stub template. I wrote the original stub in an awful hurry last night after I realized that all of the mentions of Cor. columns in various articles linked to Call. the poet. Oy. Chick Bowen 15:34, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
You're an editor after my own heart. I chase down redlinks that should be blue. Callimachus the poet is probably the more central Callimachus: if it weren't for the Vitruvius tale, who'd remember him? --Wetman 16:56, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Update:I think I've eliminated the spurious versions. Column had said he was a bronze-worker. I took it out, but do you know any basis for that? Obviously, if it's true about the lamp, he must have known something about metal, but a bronze-worker implies something else. Chick Bowen 19:01, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I've seen "bronze-worker" on the Internet, but I've been ignoring it, as unnecessary and probably too confident, for a sculpor of whom there is nothing you can grab and say, "This is by Callimachus." The oil lamp he "invented" for the Erechtheum was executed in gold. All the sculpture assessed as copies of his work, and such attributions are less enthusiastically pursued than they were a hundred years ago, according to this devastating review, is in marble. Not every Hellenistic or Roman sculpture copying an implied original of the late 5th century that subscribes to the canons of Polyclitus and features filmy, revealing draperies and running drill technique is a copy of Callimachus. Do you think the entry is cautious enough? --Wetman 00:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, Andrew Stewart seems like the most cautious account I can find. I copied the text from here and, for convenience, put it here: User:Chick Bowen/Stewart. He does mention metal-working but he doesn't cite anything and I think it's based on the lamp. The katatexitechnos (or katatechnos) thing was puzzling me, but what he says makes sense. Chick Bowen 02:11, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Persecution Of Christians[edit]

Heya there thanks for correcting me in that sentence :)--Sargon 14:16, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

It's those Italians confusing us: they've just recently arrived at the venticento.... --Wetman 12:41, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Catholic Encyclopedia[edit]

I've noticed you have worked on an article that is covered by the public domain Catholic Encyclopedia. While a religious resource, there is a great deal of impartial information about historical events, persons and ideas that are covered by the CE. I've created a project page for the Catholic Encyclopedia as part of the Missing encyclopedic articles project to coordinate incorporation of relevant information from the CE into wikipedia. I would appreciate any help you can offer in the project. Reflex Reaction 21:17, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Excellent project. I've been creating modernized and neutral versions of CE articles since 2003, but my efforts are spotty, depending on my pursuit of the subject. That all Catholic Encyclopedia topics should be covered in Wikipedia is axiomatic. I have often been surprised to see no external reference to CE even on articles on saints and cult. By the way, for information that's even more impartial, the Jewish Encyclopedia is to be recommended as your next project of this kind! --Wetman 12:41, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
The Jewish Encyclopedia project was the inspiration for the Catholic encyclopedia project even though now it looks like it has been in stasis for a while. It has been stuck at <1% progress for several months now. While I have been pretty dedicated to the project, it's mostly been pruning and not much content creation, though other persons at the Missing encyclopedic articles have been doing hard work. As for progress and next projects I don't think that the Catholic Encyclopedia will be finished for at least a year and I think I will be done with religious themed focuses for a while. --Reflex Reaction 13:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
I really don't blame you. Thanks for the details. I'll keep chipping away at both projects in my little way. --Wetman 17:28, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Unusual AfD for you[edit]

I thought you might find this interesting: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of revenues. It's gotten no responses. Chick Bowen 23:28, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes indeed, and thanks for the advisory. Interesting material, which shouldn't be lost, but not encyclopediable in the tabularformat. --Wetman 12:41, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Titans[edit]

Hi. I changed the Titans article from "in Forrrest" to "in the forest" because I could not figure out what "Forrrest" was, reading Hesiod. So temporarily, I changed it to "in the forest". Not vandalism !!! My reading of Hesiod actually says he was placed in a cave, but I needed to look at the Greek. That's why I made a conservative change until I had time to read the Greek of Hesiod. There was no "vandalism". Help ? Wikiklrsc 17:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

The vandalism, you still haven't noted, changed 'Crete' to "Forrrest". Zeus was not born "in the forest" but in Crete. When reverting, it's always good to check these things: I've often made similar errors myself. The vandalism was not yours. I said nothing about carelessness. --Wetman 17:37, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the clarifications. Points taken. -- Wikiklrsc 18:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: "Cleanup" tag at Province[edit]

I take wikipedia seriously and find it offensive that you assume I would add to an article for comedic purposes. Take a look at the article. The ideas in the first paragraph are repeated in section 1. The introduction section has no direction and little organization. There are spelling and grammar errors (which I will take the time to fix). The 1st and 6th paragraphs in section 1 is repedative and need to be joined in some agreeable fashion. Do not take offense. I understand that people have projects that they put their time and effort into, and thus become close to. However, regardless of the effort that has been put into this article, it does need improvement. If I had purchased an encyclopedia with entries like this I would want my money back. Remember, the reason for placing a notice is not to insult the contributors, but to aid the processes by bringing in more contributers. Please control your emotions for the advancement of knowlege. I will place this conversation on the discussion page of province where it belongs.--Dustin Asby 19:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

It's perfectly natural to assume that a non-contributor who applies a "cleanup" label to an article he has never edited is a prankster. Whether Province is at present "repedative" or not, it can certainly be improved.
Additionally, for those of us who are taught from an early age never to take offense at anything, to hear it announced that someone "takes offense" has a cheapness to it, in the sense that, without any expenditure of intellectual energy, one attempts to put the other in the wrong. Long experience has confirmed my distrust of this little maneuver. Brilliant editing on the part of Dustin Asby, however, will prove my initial instincts were ill-founded. I certainly hope so. --Wetman 20:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


Luciano Alì[edit]

Do you happen to know of anything, anyhting at all of the above named architect, other than he designed Palazzo Beneventano. I think the big page is nearing completion, if you see any faults, or anything that should be included.......I'm just sorting out as many of the red links as possible, I may "de-red" some of them if I can't find some more information, bit it is surprising what further information comes to light researching the minor players. I was to expand Rosario Gagliardi and Andrea Palma a little, then I think I'm done with it, for a while! regards Giano | talk 09:04, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

King of Asia[edit]

Wetman, I've responded to your comments at Talk:King of Asia. In short, I take issue with your contention that this is an anachronism - as far as I can tell, the term was used in ancient sources (e.g. Arrian). Anyway, a response would be appreciated. john k 20:35, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


Tudorbethan Style architecture[edit]

Care to comment on the latest page move here: [8], I don't see how you can have a style of a pastiche - or can you? Giano | talk 08:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Digamma and Linear B[edit]

Can you judge this anonymous edit: [9]?

A quick Google search revealed some mentioning of this theory in discussion groups, rather fishy evidence IMHO, but I'm not an expert.

Pjacobi 20:35, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

No, I'm not competent to assess the material. --Wetman 21:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Henry the Navigator[edit]

An article that you've edited before (Henry the Navigator) is nominated for Biography Collaboration of the Week. If you want go there and vote. Thanks. Gameiro 20:44, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


Sic Bar[edit]

Thanks for you encouraging words, I couldn't reply until I had completed the changes to the lead. I know people mean well! but sometimes the English vocabulary I was taught at school, (not that long ago seems very antiquated.) I hold my hand up, my grammar is appalling, and without spell check..well we need not go there.

It is a complex subject, a minor phrase here and there changes the whole meaning,and I can't look at it if it's wrong. I'm not sure I've done the subject justice, someone said today it is digressive perhaps it is, but the whole history behind anything are its motivation and reason for being. Then someone else wanted an explanation of Spanish architecture where does digression stop? personally I quite liked it when Bishonen did her final copy edit of my grammar and POV etc. People keep saying the "pictures" are nice! Well at least there' something nice to look at! PS do you like my tabloid style "For the first time in world history the rich were homeless and needed to be housed."........ As ever Giano

  • No the tabloid style was not for me, so I've thrown a Latin strop on the FAC page, immensely satisfying and instant lifting of responsibility, rather like going to confession without the inconvenience of a penance. I'm going for a while to concentrate on the less worthy but sometimes delightful architectural delights of Aylesbury here [10] do add something, its a fun page about buildings which are not notable and provincial, but make up of the chemistry of an unremarkable English town. (Franks 2000 is a Co. contributor and head photographer) I shall have to think of a reason for them being notable and worthy of wikipedia in the conclusion, so add what you like. It is never going to FAC, and if it does I'll vote oppose! Giano | talk 22:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject[edit]

Hi, this is a general invite, asking whether anyone might be interested in joining a long term Wikiproject

(As in Biblical Criticism, rather than about criticising the bible)

Its goal is to increase the amount of information originating from academia in biblical articles, as it is noticably lacking at the moment, this includes

  • Textual criticism
  • Critical theories
  • Mention, and summary, of historical commentaries (i.e. commentaries interpreting the subject from people thousands of years ago)
  • Information concerning change in interpretation, over tim
  • Interpretations from historic groups cast as heretics by the mainstream, including esoteric traditions (such as from groups like those responsible for the Book of Enoch)
  • Interpretations from historic groups who were once the mainstream, but where the interpretation is no longer supported by the mainstream.
  • Apologetics (from academic sources, rather than local religious people)

This also includes transferring the information present in the public domain Jewish Encyclopedia, which is not present in Wikipedia. This work is over 100 years old, and so the information needs updating once copied over, e.g. by taking account of subsequent scholarship (e.g. Martin Noth, Richard Friedman, Israel Finkelstein).

--francis 15:34, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

papal families[edit]

Hello, Wetman. I noticed that you added several families to Category:Papal families but hadn't yet created a page for that category, so I've done so, just to avoid the redlink. It's a minimal page; feel free to add to it. I put it in Category:Families; whether it would make sense to put it in Category:Italian families instead I don't know—I'll leave that up to you.Chick Bowen 03:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I tried to create the category but was stumped. Good thing there are Wikipedians like you around. --Wetman 04:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Barbarian[edit]

Thanks for the nice tweakings and addings to the barbarian entry.

I modified your "industrial" addition as I thought the spread of personal slaveowning was equally important, though maybe now I have longwinded on about slaves for so short a section. (I hope to put some new material up in the Greek section of Slavery in Antiquity if you're in a tweaky mood again, though I've been dragging my feet some.)

I changed myriads back to hundreds as I think it's true and I prefer the earthy literalness of the number.

Very appealing phrasing about the Hellenized names of Trojans in Homer, but I wonder if some people might find it a little misleading. 'Hellenized' might suggest a veneer of alteration as if an earlier set of names had gone through a conversion (for instance like changing Andrew into Andreas), whereas if indigenous Trojan names were ever known to the poetic tradition, in Homer it looks like a set of straight out Greek names have been plonked down onto the characters. If it seems this is fussy, then leave it as it is: it's certainly good to have a sense present in the entry of actual non-Greeks who would have had names of their own. (Hmm, seems people have proposed some Luvian lurkers afer all, possible at least, for Priam and Alexandros, though that second one looks as greek as greek can be; but anyway maybe my They're-all-just-greek-names overshot the mark.)

I wasn't calling you a barbarian when by mistake I made the heading barbarian here without any content.Flounderer 12:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It's become a good article, I think. My "myriad cultures" meant to convey the fact of many many, though "hundreds" seems inflated. "Scores of cultures" might more literally hit the mark? When your material goes into Slavery in Antiquity, do add a "Main article... header at the appropriate place in Barbarian. --Wetman 18:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I changed it to scores. I was using hundreds as I was thinking of all the ethnic groups and tribes Greeks came into contact with across the full range of their diffusion and wanderings, the total pool of different "peoples" encountered by individual Greeks. For major cultural groupings the number would obviously be smaller. Flounderer 01:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Athenian democracy[edit]

I was wondering if you (or someone else!) would be interested in talking a look (that was a good slip) at this entry. It's at a bloated crossroads and is out of balance (with me as the main bloater and unbalancer). There needs to be some discussion about scope. Part of the interest of the topic lies in comparison with modern forms bearing the same name, but it's easy for this to involve a going off half-cocked, or letting it rest on summary and misleadingly short accounts, a sort of stray titbits aproach. Another issue of balance is between the institutional mechanics and social/ideological/performative aspects. I would value the presence of some extra voices. Flounderer 04:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

It's looking pretty good to me, Flounderer. --Wetman 16:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. It's complaining about its size, but maybe there's no urgency to respond to that. There are still some things missing which I think it would good to have coverage of. Flounderer 07:25, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Scottish baronial style[edit]

I've just found this stub, and rewritten it off the top of my head, would you like to look it over, I'm sure Scott? and Abbotsford|Abbeyfield?? all ring bells here. It's not really my field. I'm sure with your sense of humour you could enjoy yourself here for half an hour! regards Giano | talk 12:10, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I added some more baronial structures. And a reference to Folly. --Wetman 16:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Aulus Aemilius Pudens[edit]

Wetman, if your goal is to make some of the articles better, where you have put the {{disputed}} tag, please look at the comments KenWilliams made in Talk:Aulus_Aemilius_Pudens. I believe they lie somewhere between your understanding and mine, are more informatiave, and may result in non-disputed articles. --WikiRat 00:13, 6 November 2005 (EST)

(Wetman avoids applying the disputed tag.)

We should talk to WikiRat[edit]

Given how you seem to have been having problems with with WikiRat as well, maybe you could take a look at Talk:Celtic Christianity as well. Myself and several other users have been trying to get him to stop putting original research into articles of this nature, and I figure if we get enough people to reason with him on the same talk page, we might have some success.--Rob117 22:48, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

There is no reasoning with this person, who has no concept of evidence to temper his reading and seems self-appointed to challenge what he perceives as dogma and orthodoxy: see Talk:Joseph of Arimathea. Familiar contentious attitudes, with every measured statement reduced to a matter of personalities. But I shall add Celtic Christianity to my Watchlist and see if I can help. --Wetman 23:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

San Francisco War Memorial Opera House[edit]

New stub article for you, with image- small because it is hacked together from two digital images. We missed the first tour and the second was canceled, so the interiors will come later. Probably better images on film to come. Others of your requests to come sooner or later. - Leonard G. 05:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Excellent! excellent! I added some details. --Wetman 06:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Notification of POV-pusher & libeler conspiracy[edit]

This notification is being sent to FT2, Iantresman, Harald88, and Wetman, as these 4 people have responded in support of my proposition to include the wikipedia policy 'POV selective fact suppression'.

I made a note on the page wikipedia_talk:Neutral point of view that both the users Saxifrage and Dominick stalked me to said page, and that Dominick only started stalking me because Todfox notified him that I called him on his POV-pushing behavior on my user page. On my user page (user:NPOVenforcer), I have listed many people that have either pushed a POV and/or have used libel instead of fair argument, so as to warn innocent wikipedians of who to look out for. Saxifrage and Dominick both saw the list of trouble users, which included themselves as well as Todfox (aka 'Kit') due to their past offenses. Saxifrage and Dominick are thus conspiring to trying to suppress the POV selective fact suppression policy so as to give themselves free reign to make as many selective fact suppressions as they want. Also, Todfox is conspiring with Dominick to libel my informative list as an 'enemy list' via their RFC on my user page at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/NPOVenforcer (libel violates the wikipedia civilty policy, by the way), so as to try to get rid of the informative list and give them free reign to violate as many wikipedia policies as they want. On said libelous RFC, Dominick actually committed the criminal offense of trying to frame me of threatening his person, so as to try to put me in prison under false pretenses. I hope you find such behavior apalling as I do. It is for that reason that I am creating an RFA against Dominick to permanently ban his IP for his criminal offense against me. I hope that you come to support it. Why should you help save me from Dominick's offenses? -Because I am fighting to support the NPOV nature of wikipedia articles, so what benefits me benefits you through my actions, because you also support the NPOV policy. Besides, Dominick may victimize one of you next. Have you heard the saying "We will all hang together or we will all hang separately"? NPOVenforcer 05:53, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

courage[edit]

Only you can judge yourself in this way. However, I think that whoever first suggests merging or otherwise removing an article ought to do so in a way that invites discussion from both sides. I think the tactful way you raised the issue on "culture of human beings" was entirely appropriate and admirable, Slrubenstein | Talk 00:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you: I bite my tail bashfully like Bert Lahr in Wizard of Oz. --Wetman 00:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

San Francisco City Hall[edit]

New images to the article, several in a gallery. The latter need title or commentary on the image page. Some are not especially good and will be replaced as I obtain improved images. - Leonard G. 02:58, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Ghiradelli Square[edit]

I picked up a panorama from the fountain plaza, but neither of my cameras were up to the task. It was also difficult (in this case) due to the Fall sunlighting and the orientation and position of the complex (it is on the north side of a steep hill) - I suspect that a high overcast day would be better for this subject. Also, a good aerial photo would be best to capture the entirety of the complex, this would require a Summer solstice light, so this comes next year. - Leonard G. 02:58, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

bluebot[edit]

I dont understand what you mean, all my bot does is ensure the {{1911}} tag is under a references heading. Martin 08:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Allat and Q'r[edit]

Hello , I saw your discussions on Uzza Talk page.An expert in Semitic mythology once told me that the original name of the deity called Allat was Q'r, who was a goddess of new moon and transformation , she was sure that Q'r is of African origin and most probably connected with Tanit and Neith.She also spoke of the conjecture that the name Quraysh is derived from Q'r and being the most important local goddess , she came to be called simply the goddess/Allat.Do you have any information about Q'r? Thanks for help.Pasha 10:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I have nothing, but all I know anyway is what I read: I have no advisor, but Allat simply means "goddess", doesn't it? A title, rather than a name. So if her name were Q'r among some of her votaries, that would be perfectly reasonable. A question to resolve: how are names transmitted among illiterate people, generally speaking? Place names help where there is some thread of cultural continuity. If Q'r is derived from Quraysh, is it because the aysh phoneme in other contexts has designated "people"? A good Arabist would know. However, it would be circular then to derive that interpretation from the existence of a deity Q'r, don't you see? I'm habitually dubious about deities that are "connected" with other deities in the manner that Greeks always saw Zeus in the chief male gods of their neighbors. It is difficult enough to assess etymologies of names of tribes and peoples, when they are retrieved or invented after the fact. And in a culture where a well-indoctrinated Muslim will look you steadily in the eye and tell you that Allat cannot exist in Arabic— an impossible formation— or that there is no connection between Asherah and Ashurah, it is difficult to reach any truths. --Wetman 21:41, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Allat certainly means the goddess , and the deity refered to as Allat should had had a name of her own .Pagan Arabs didnt have any theological conception of the goddess as a unique conterpart to Allah so the goddess should actually mean the most famous goddess and it seems very strange that the name of this most famous goddess seems forgotten.I shall search for aysh phoneme .The existance of Q'r is not supposed to have been derived from Quraysh , connecting the etymology of Quraysh to Q'r is just a conjecture based on importance of Q'r to that tribe. What you mentioned is realy an obstacle.Pasha 22:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Remember that theological conceptions that the pagan Arabs may have had are read today largely through an Islamic lens, producing ingrained conceptions like "a unique conterpart to Allah." One must be able to leave Allah entirely aside, or one will not get far. For a title that becomes a name, compare Dione. The Lady of the Labyrinth was apparently named Ariadne, according to Kerenyi, but without a large body of surviving texts and a long-established critical tradition, it would have been impossible to demonstrate. The "Lady of Ephesus" became so firmly identified with Artemis by Hellenes, it is a hard job to disentangle her now, in spite of the iconic image; a single inscription mentions her by her title, but her name is irretrievable. A further problem: the Goddess may have had many local names, among them Q'r. In Greece, local deities were recalled as epithets of the major Olympians, as the result of a pre-literate social and cult transformation. --Wetman 22:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Populism, Elitism, Liberalism and Vandalism[edit]

I think I need a little bit of help on Remington and the Rattlesnakes. This user have violated the 3RR on Populism and has continued some weird war on liberals and elitists on the Elitism, Liberal Elite (supposedly confirming that the cultural elitism of Luxembourg), and the Luann disambig page. I really hate this part of Wikipedia and if you'd help me out it'd help alot. Thanks, --TheGrza 03:25, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I hate that part of Wikipedia too, so much so, that I have resolutely refused to become an administrator. I have such limited reserves of patience that I must husband my meager resources. I find that if I ignore a page for a couple of months, I can return, after those of brief attention span have moved on, and select from the best of the intervening edits by opening the page in two tabs, selecting "Page history" in one and in the other "Edit", which I set at the last sensible Revision. Then I just clean up, the way one would tidy up after a party of sloppy drunks. --Wetman 04:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

The sloppy drunks analogy is perfect. I think I'm going to try your method; easier on the brain and more likely to preserve some faith in this crazy experiment.--TheGrza 13:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely! See game rules at User:Wetman. --Wetman 19:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Superstition[edit]

Cleaning up the article and replacing irrational and invalid with untrue is suppression? Please. Roy Brumback 7:56, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

(As you know Gentle Reader, the essence of superstition is not defined by the "truth" of the result, but by the methods through which it is searched for— too fine a distinction for this mediocrity, apparently.)

Ancient Greek phonology[edit]

You may not be aware that this article was moved.... I think it would be useful for you to contribute your point of view, as there is an attempt at mediation with Thrax. --Macrakis 20:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

It's an interesting subject, but my view is not a competent one. --Wetman 22:19, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
I believe you are more than competant to weigh the evidence that has been presented. But, much as I'd appreciate your contributions, obviously I can't oblige you to act. --Macrakis 00:02, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Hello![edit]

I don't think we've met before on Wikipedia. I just wanted to come by and say a word of greetings. I noticed your edits to Androuet and it has sparked my curiosity...what should it redirect to? --HappyCamper 01:45, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Hello! Just working on it now— to the dynasty of architects and designers Androuet du Cerceau. Hold back an hour or two before you edit there, and see my new material first! --Wetman 02:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Androuët is/was also the name of a famous restaurant in Paris specializing in cheese (for all courses!). I don't know if it still exists; the web site androuet.com seems to be dead. Any connection with your Androuets? --Macrakis 02:41, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, coattails, coattails! Jean Androuet du Cerceau was the major Paris architect of the Louis XIII period. Was the restaurant in the Marais, where many of his hôtels survive? --Wetman 03:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
From http://www.fromag.com/dico.html:
Androuët : La Maison Androuët, installée au 41 rue d’Amsterdam à Paris 8e, est une des plus célèbre crémerie, mondialement connue. Créée en 1909 par Henri Androuët, elle est devenue avec le temps un lieu magique, tel le temple des inconditionnels où l’on pouvait y découvrir les meilleures spécialités dans de superbes caves d’affinage et le plus beau plateau de fromages avec les plus fins mariages de terroirs. Avec le restaurant et les salons aménagés, l’adresse prit une ampleur auprès d’un public de plus en plus exigeant. Pierre Androuët, son fils, lui succéda après la guerre. Le développement continua avec l’ouverture d’un bar à vin et le réaménagement de l’ensemble. La parution de son encyclopédie avec plus de 400 fromages répertoriés vint couronner une des plus belles aventures de l’histoire du fromage.
So I don't see any obvious connection besides the name. --Macrakis 22:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
"Androuet" is an old-French equivalent of "Andy" isn't it? so there must be plenty of perfectly independent Androuets. The material above might go, as it suggests, into History of Cheese (!!). --Wetman 06:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Quelle Coincidence[edit]

Never mind all that fancy French stuff above. It's fascinating isn't it, when checking the links to my new stubs, nearly always red links of yours occur - perhaps you would like to expand a little - Christopher Hussey. Incidentally, for those of us in the distant provinces and mountains without broadband (we almost wind up the telephone by hand here) your page takes 1/4 hour to download, but don't let that worry you sophisticated city folk - we've nothing better to do than chat to a goat here while Wetman's talk reaches the bottom! Hope all is well. Regards Giano | talk 22:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Done! As you command. But, like tunneling through Villa dei Papyri, no sooner has one satisfied the redlinks of one space, further redlinks appear. Each can of worms is a can of worms... Agreed, it's past time I archive this current scroll. --Wetman 04:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Well you obviously have far better google results thsn here on the bare mountainside. Thanks a lot. I was surprised to find he died in 1970, my grandmother knew him in the 1920s, and I always immagined, from the way she spoke, he was far older than her, yet they were about the same age. Funny the thing one learns here. isn't it? Giano | talk 09:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Extremely Sorry[edit]

I am extremely sorry to drag you into this, but you are cited as one of the people apparantly opposed to my version of the article (even though you haven't actually made any edits to it, or commented on talk, since I began editing in Wikipedia).

I wonder if you could corroborate/deny this "in person" - Talk:Table of nations. --User:FDuffy 11:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Mistaken identity apparently. What article, to begin with?. Cited by whom, where?

--Wetman 14:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC)