User talk:Arcayne

semi-retired

This user values third opinions and occasionally provides one.

Friday

7

June

01:31 UTC

♦My Spellbook♦ (Or, "How I Learned to Stop Hatin' & Love All the Crazy") Arc 001 Arc 002 Arc 003 Arc 004 Arc 005 Arc 006 mostly out all weekend Weekly RfA Dramaz Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update RfA candidate S O N S % Status Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report Elli 196 6 2 97 Open 16:53, 7 June 2024 15 hours no report Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1 You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3. I thought you might want to sign up for Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1 from 10:30-11:45 a.m. on Saturday May 1, 2010 at the UIC Student Center West.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC) Re: Carnival Masks The Nelson material (Kubrick, Inside a Film Artists Maze) cited in the new section explicitly states "Venetian carnival masks". However, this is more an assertion about origin and usage ancient and modern that is not consistent. Venetian masks have their ultimate origin in the Carnival of Venice which generally runs about two weeks prior to Ash Wednesday, though they are often worn at other times of the year. A few centuries later such masks became prevalent in performances of "Commedia Dell'arte". A few more centuries after that there was a precipitous decline in the celebration of the Venetian Carnival and the association of that style of mask with the Carnival season was somewhat severed. The Carnival event came back with a vengeance after it having been banned by Mussolini whose regime was toppled by the Allies in WW2. The term "Venetian mask" and "Venetian carnival mask" are sometimes used synonymously because of their original source and restored current usage. (Books on Italian painters virtually always refer to "Venetian carnival masks". However, as mentioned the Nelson material already cited in the new section does indeed say "Venetian carnival masks"--WickerGuy (talk) 20:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC) The feathered masks are one of many varieties of Venetian carnival masks. One is a subspecies of the other. If you need a citation, see this. But, effectively this is like writing about The Lion King, and stating we can say the the animals in the film generally are indigenous to Africa but we cannot say specifically that the hyenas are indigenous to Africa. WickerGuy (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC) The Nelson citation I gave earlier identifying the party masks generally as "Venetian carnival masks" does not in any way exclude the feathered masks worn by the women. You however want to possibly exclude them because they are feathered, and thus that raise questions for you as to whether Nelson's general description of the party masks overall includes the feathered ones or not. If you really need that citation, the same website with Venetian feathered masks also has [1] overtly providing the carnival as the historical context of Venetian masks generally and specifically this link of theirs [2] states it is a display of carnival masks and has a picture of a feathered one, one of which (the Volto) is like that worn by the women (and is specifically identified as being a mask from Eyes Wide Shut.) Nonetheless since Nelson said nothing to exclude the feathered masks, I am unconvinced that the burden of proof lies with me!! Dolphins are mammals though aquatic (though all mammals nurse their young by definition), and ostriches and penguins are birds although they cannot fly (though all birds by definition have wings and lay eggs and are bipedal). It is well-known that certain classes of objects have a certain trait over 90% of the time but not always.WickerGuy (talk) 23:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC) In your rebuttal you state 'The Nelson citation indeed identifies the masks as "Venetian masks"'. The Nelson citation at one point very specifically says "Venetian carnival masks" (page 322 in footnotes but not p. 289 if that's where you are looking)- also Nelson on p. 289 notes that Red Cloak plays simultaneously the "dual role of King of Carnival and Grand Inquisitor". You want to make a special exception for feathered ones. You haven't searched Nelson carefully enough. You didn't actually misquote him, since I assume you only looked on p. 289, but you certainly didn't review the citation with very much care!!!! As for the mask shop, Citation 3 possibly should have been [3] which has a mask with feathers identified as being in EWS and is categorized quite specifically as a "carnival mask". A reasonably reputable Venetian store's identification of a feathered mask as "carnival" should be sufficient whether or not EWS is being used as a marketing device or not. You are also entirely mistaken about "Phantom of the Opera". The mask in my earlier (uncorrected) citation 3 listed as the "Phantom" mask is identical to the one Gerard Butler wore in the film!!!![4] (But since the novel vastly predates the film or play, I don't even see why they are obligated to be the same.) This is your very first rebuttal to me that contains two factual errors and one poor piece of reasoning. You didn't really search Nelson carefully, your observation about the Phantom mask is just wrong, and also irrelevant since the novel of Phantom preceded the musical by many decades. I'm having an increasingly difficult time taking this at all seriously.--WickerGuy (talk) 04:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)