Jump to content

User talk:Giano: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Turkette: FYI, query
Kylu (talk | contribs)
Line 33: Line 33:
::*No I certainly don't want to be banned, in fact I heve just this minute been sorting out the last person who banned me [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Carnildo 3|here]]. People would do well to remember the "curse of San Giacomo". [[User:Giano|Giano]] | [[User talk:Giano|talk]] 16:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
::*No I certainly don't want to be banned, in fact I heve just this minute been sorting out the last person who banned me [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Carnildo 3|here]]. People would do well to remember the "curse of San Giacomo". [[User:Giano|Giano]] | [[User talk:Giano|talk]] 16:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
:FYI, the EE case is about to close, and you're not going to be banned after all, so there. Now, as a relative newbie, I ask, should I take the time to read through the Carnildo evidence, or let it go? [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 22:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
:FYI, the EE case is about to close, and you're not going to be banned after all, so there. Now, as a relative newbie, I ask, should I take the time to read through the Carnildo evidence, or let it go? [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 22:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

== ==[[User talk:Lar]]== ==

I'd really appreciate it if you'd consider letting go of that conversation. We're starting to tread into the realm of blockable civility violations ([[WP:CIVIL]] obviously) and he's already changed his response. Further taunts and namecalling might end up with the result of suspension of your editing privilages. If you feel the need to reply, please do it here. <b><i><font color="#FF00FF">~Kylu ([[User:Kylu|u]]|[[User talk:Kylu|t]]) </font></i></b> 00:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:47, 30 August 2006

Giano is on tour and Cecilia is on holiday - so editing will be sporadic for a few days

Old messages are at


Please leave new messages at the foot of the page

Voting

I'm canvassing votes for our mate in Cambridge at Charles Matthews Election Candidate. Perhaps you might like to make a contribution?--Mcginnly | Natter 10:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Waddesdon Manor

Curious about your reasoning for removal of Waddesdon Manor from cat [Châteauesque architecture] -- it seems to accord well with the definition of "Châteauesque" given in that article. --mervyn 07:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Waddesdon Manor is a faithful reproduction of a chateau designed by a Frenchman, there are no anomalies its design as a chateau, chateauesque houses are houses in the style of a chateau, often large 19th century houses which have one of two chateauesque type features such as a turret, or mansard roof, to give them the "air" of a chateau but without these features would be just normal houses for the location they are in. I thought long and hard before putting Waddesdon's close relation Halton House in the chateauesque category. and finally decided it that it is basically a Victorian Mansion with some French embellishments to give a chateau appearance. Waddesdon though is thoroughly a chateau, therefore not "chateauesque" as it has no concessions in external architecture to the architecture of its location or time. I hope this explains my view. Giano | talk 10:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Waddesdon Manor is not a "faithful reproduction", it is a mélange of Loire château elements, albeit a superbly executed one (complete with Victorian porte-cochère!). I would argue that if "Châteauesque" is the term that Wikipedia is using for the "neo-chateau" strand in Revival styles in 19th-century architecture, then the whole spectrum of victorian chateaux should be included, ranging from the high-status, least "debased" examples like Waddesdon Manor, down to the low-status, most debased examples of suburban turreted villas. Otherwise you need to define how a separation is made. Hope you follow? --mervyn 11:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No I don't follow. Waddesdon is a prime example of Neo-Renaissance architecture (where photographs of the manor are used to illustrate) rather than a bourgeois mongrel architectural style which is basically what chateauesque architecture is. However, your understanding of architecture is obviously far superior to mine so place Waddesdon in whichever category you feel most suitable. I am well aware that Waddesdon is a melange of authentic styles - I wrote the page. Giano | talk 11:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your reply makes it seem as if I am trying to be awkward or personal, which I'm not. I am just saying that the definition of Châteauesque as it stands, does not exclude Waddesdon Manor -- but it is that article (Châteauesque) that needs our attention I think. --mervyn 12:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turkette

I think you may want to hold off on integrating the word into daily conversation. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And there was me thinking they were part of your culture.....I'm devastated to see my new word AFD'd - not that we would ever use any such object ourselves. I note you want a page on napkin rings - even with your obsession with food and gluttony you surely do not use the same napkin twice. You'll be advocating a page on fish knives and doilies next. Amusingly (to me anyway) I've just seen on fork etiquette you all eat in that way because it allows "The dropping of the left hand into the lap near a pistol or another knife, however, was an important safety precaution" what a load of blx, who thinks this rubbish up? Turkettes and pistols at the dinner table, you'll be telling me you Americans allow small children in the dining room next. Giano | talk 22:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't look at me. I like food, but know nothing about table manners, American, Continental or otherwise. I can only imagine what it is like when the Gianos dine; just imagining the elegant dance of the butlers dutifully handing out (from the left) wet naps for your soup-spattered chest wig and gold-effect medallion brings a small tear to my eye. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am shocked an amazed that we are missing such table necessities as the fish knife and napkin ring, when we have the spork and the butter knife. Is this serviette ring meant to be a sort of tourniquet, or perhaps Turk's head? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALoan you marvel, that's the word I was seeking tourniquet, allthough I have found "torquette" which I think is much the same thing. I'm very surprised BoG does not have torquettes and tourniquets on his dining table like the rest of his compatriots - perhaps they are not so civilized in Idaho as the rest of the USA. In fact I may start a new page User: Giano/All American turckette as my small contribution to the culture of that great country. Giano | talk 16:00, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You certainy were helpful at the AfD! I can't wait for the noobs to roll in and take you at face value there. I'd make a joke about who needs a tourniquet and where it best be applied, but, you know, don't want to be banned and all. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:05, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No I certainly don't want to be banned, in fact I heve just this minute been sorting out the last person who banned me here. People would do well to remember the "curse of San Giacomo". Giano | talk 16:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, the EE case is about to close, and you're not going to be banned after all, so there. Now, as a relative newbie, I ask, should I take the time to read through the Carnildo evidence, or let it go? Newyorkbrad 22:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd really appreciate it if you'd consider letting go of that conversation. We're starting to tread into the realm of blockable civility violations (WP:CIVIL obviously) and he's already changed his response. Further taunts and namecalling might end up with the result of suspension of your editing privilages. If you feel the need to reply, please do it here. ~Kylu (u|t) 00:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]