User talk:Victoriaearle: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:57, 3 December 2011

Things

Blank page mostly again I see, well fine. I'm not espically given to sentimantiality, but I always prefered Paul to John, even in the most dissonant music I listen to I like a bit of a hook or a melodic center; the blending of the two is where you get pay off. Whatever, two bits of unablushed sentimality for you to cheer you up. [1] [2]. Ceoil (talk) 04:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two very nice tunes that I've always liked, thanks. I thought if I whittled down the page slowly, maybe one day it would be gone. <that's half a joke, btw> I'm still here, not talking about leaving or going, because obviously not going. Free this weekend, but after that will truly be crazy busy for two weekends, will have to work about 14 days straight or something like that. I thought I'd use this weekend to finish sorting out the Hemingway situation. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope TCO is watching and realises the gun he has given to the ignorant, go with half impressions, thick, portion of the cummunity. Toese with templates and axes to grind are only the start of it. Twice now his gun has been fired at you. In the industry I work in, the claims he made vs the method he used would have him laughed at, pitied and fired. More or less that order, though maybe not with much pity. 14:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

We've heard so much about how templates slow load time - can't really believe I'm doing this again after last year's episode on Ezra when we went in the opposite direction. That said, Alarbus is a developer and I'm interested in his opinion. This is something I'd like to reconcile in my mind. I'm not all English major stupid when it comes to server performance and page load times. As for coming to wiki specifically to write to join a group I didn't even know existed - it's not really worth spending time on. In my mind that's whatever stuff. Truthkeeper (talk) 15:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

fyi, I mentioned you on ANI. Alarbus (talk) 15:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...but I was counting on your help with those articles. :( . I even started working on Edward Sapir counting on you to clean it up for me. Please...·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 16:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I had an eye on Bartolomé de las Casas - it's a nice page and I wouldn't mind getting back to some of that work. But I keep being distracted. I'm hoping things will calm down after the holidays, in about a month. Truthkeeper (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IF you get blocked then I will fall too, altough its far more likely I'll get blocked. But would it not be romantic, we go down together, like Bonny and Clyde. Ceoil (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa wants us to be blocked and she's far from uninvolved. If I get blocked for writing and maintaining an FA that's also core or vital or some such shit, then it tells a story. And I am so willing to take my first block over this. Am not willing to spend my Saturday going all over the place gather diffs. Truthkeeper (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have real doubts that anybody that has an openion thats worth 2p takes Diannaa serious, so lets let it go. Ceoil (talk) 19:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consolatio

I always think of this sort of thing as the episode of Xena when she's in the women's prison, the scene where she's lifting stones all night to bury a fellow prisoner, and the scene where she's covered with rats. Really, literature articles in general are some of the poorest on WP, and you are one of the few people who devotes consistent and quality time to this important topic area. (So you too are a woman? How did that escape me before? There are so few of us.) I hope you will feel like restoring that lovely Magdalen Reading image soon, whether you do or note. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded re the image, and I'll vouch for Cynwolfe being on the side of content. You can take her at face value. Not that we need to be paranoid or anything or afraid of smiling strangers :) Ceoil (talk) 19:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Her peace has been destroyed, but I'll put her back at some point because I do love that painting. And yes, I am a woman. The thing that makes me angry to my core is that I don't have a lot of time these days for this place and I am one of the few content contributors to the lit articles. Without constant interruptions and strife I'd accomplish much more. If women have to be Xena to survive Wikipedia, it doesn't say much about Wikipedia. And the other lesson here is that the three worst disputes I've had have been on core or vital articles - which is telling. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Waves hand in recoginition, TCO should try and raise Vincent van Gogh to FAC before condeming from his self appointed platform. Ceoil (talk) 19:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw - my orange bars have gone again. But um, looks like the van der Weyden is back? Truthkeeper (talk) 20:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Truthkeeper, would you welcome any drive-by feedback from a neutral party? If not, I'll be happy just to send my regards for the holiday season. Cheers, JNW (talk) 19:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds very formal. Yes, of course I welcome feedback. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TK, you know I'm very fond of you, but myself and JNW go back to around '06 so no criptic cmts pls. Its yes sir no sir mr JNW sir time. Ceoil (talk) 20:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm wishing to tread lightly, since my thoughts are unsolicited. Also, I edit wearing a tux.

I haven't followed the history of the current dust-up; I've chosen to make less and less time for Wikidramas, which means I edit infrequently. It's a given that you're a valuable contributor. The things that make you mad are surely much the same as those that get under my skin, but the machinations of Wikipedia are no different than they are elsewhere: Interruptions and strife are unavoidable, and working conditions always entail compromised situations; the higher profile the article, the more certain it is that any substantive editing will provoke disputes. These are reasons I've retired, and when I return it's mostly to work in less-traveled fields. I choose to stay away from the van Goghs and the Hemingways for these very reasons--when the process becomes more annoying than rewarding, and necessitates the imposition of willfulness, it's time to redirect one's energies. But if one chooses to wade into the juicy terrain, one had better be well-armed, or better still, exceedingly well composed. I can't do it, myself. So now I'm off to walk the dog. End of lecture, I suppose. Be well. JNW (talk) 20:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's good advice. I began working on Hemingway as a very new editor and had no idea that this stuff happens. The miracle is that I managed to finish that page without ever running into a single problem. I had a lot of help along the way - but no strife. I've been moving more and more into esoteric less traveled articles and enjoy that, so like you have found that's the way to survive. This, of course, is the reason our high profile articles will never be brought to FA status, in my view. And I welcome the advice. Do you walk the dog wearing a tux? Truthkeeper (talk) 20:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked on a couple of FAs, and enjoyed the collaborations with Ceoil, Modernist, Johnbod, Riggrmortis, etc., but FA per se is meaningless to me. It's the writing and research that's enjoyable. Don't be ridiculous--I'd never make my dog go out in formal wear. Not until after December 15, anyway. JNW (talk) 20:32, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking. I like the research and writing too - the rest has become meaningless. I think we all have to find our way of fitting in here - and that's a process. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil's block

If I could block you I would, and myself. Not because I think you deserve it, but as a show of solidarity. To be fair though I think Ceoil did go a wee bit OTT given the childish standards orf what's risibly called civility here, so I guess it was inevitable. I doubt he's too concerned about a 24-hour block anyway, just another battle scar. Malleus Fatuorum 20:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 :::::::::: I've worked on a couple of FAs, and enjoyed the collaborations with Ceoil, Modernist, Johnbod, Riggrmortis, etc., but FA per se is meaningless to me. It's the writing and research that's enjoyable. Don't be ridiculous--I'd never make my dog go out in formal wear. Not until after December 15, anyway. [[User:JNW|JNW]] ([[User talk:JNW|talk]]) 20:32, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 ::::::::::: Just checking. I like the research and writing too - the rest has become meaningless. I think we all have to find our way of fitting in here - and that's a process. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 20:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
+== Ceoil's block ==
+If I could block you I would, and myself. Not because I think you deserve it, but as a show of solidarity. To be fair though I think Ceoil did go a wee bit OTT given the childish standards orf what's risibly called civility here, so I guess it was inevitable. I doubt he's too concerned about a 24-hour block anyway, just another battle scar. [[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 20:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)