User talk:Giano II: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Giano II (talk | contribs)
→‎Please maintain civility: the problem is not what you are saying but the manner in which you choose to say it
Line 276: Line 276:


::::You have suggested in your recent edits that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IRC_channels/wikipedia-en-admins&diff=138522706&oldid=138009960 "Many users do not comport themselves in a collegial manner..."], that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IRC_channels/wikipedia-en-admins&diff=138527209&oldid=138526092 "Kelly Martin is not an admin, having given up her adminship voluntarily 'under a cloud'..."], that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IRC_channels/wikipedia-en-admins&diff=138532579&oldid=138529169 "while many admins use it responsibly others do not..."] and so on. As I said, while you may not have intended these remarks to be offensive, they are clearly capable of causing offence. As such, I urge you to refrain from making further similar statements. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 13:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::::You have suggested in your recent edits that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IRC_channels/wikipedia-en-admins&diff=138522706&oldid=138009960 "Many users do not comport themselves in a collegial manner..."], that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IRC_channels/wikipedia-en-admins&diff=138527209&oldid=138526092 "Kelly Martin is not an admin, having given up her adminship voluntarily 'under a cloud'..."], that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IRC_channels/wikipedia-en-admins&diff=138532579&oldid=138529169 "while many admins use it responsibly others do not..."] and so on. As I said, while you may not have intended these remarks to be offensive, they are clearly capable of causing offence. As such, I urge you to refrain from making further similar statements. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 13:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

::I have just edited the page concerned with a reference. Now which of the above statements is not true? It is a wikipedia page on an important wikipedia subject it is important it is factually accurate and correct. Now whicj is not true? [[User:Giano II|Giano]] 13:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::I have just edited the page concerned with a reference. Now which of the above statements is not true? It is a wikipedia page on an important wikipedia subject it is important it is factually accurate and correct. Now whicj is not true? [[User:Giano II|Giano]] 13:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

::::::The problem is not what you are saying but the manner in which you choose to say it. In [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AIRC_channels%2Fwikipedia-en-admins&diff=138554180&oldid=138547335 these edits], you make the accurate observation that there are no formal processes relating to access to the channel, but you do it while making snide remarks about David Gerard. Several other users have offered to work with you to help you make these observations in a civil fashion, and I urge you to accept their offers. Further edits like the one I have just cited will only result in a block. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 14:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Giano, could you please back off on this page for a day or two to defuse any unnecessary unhappiness on a fine Saturday morning/afternoon. I will try later today to add a couple of sentences to the article which try to address the substance of your concerns without getting into personalities. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 13:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Giano, could you please back off on this page for a day or two to defuse any unnecessary unhappiness on a fine Saturday morning/afternoon. I will try later today to add a couple of sentences to the article which try to address the substance of your concerns without getting into personalities. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 13:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:19, 16 June 2007

Old messages are at


troubled Houses

Is that what you where looking for Tynan Abbey burnt down in early 80s.--padraig3uk 10:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was blown up actually. 1981. It was then demolished (as a ruin) in 1997. Some stonework was saved though. --Counter-revolutionary 10:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see your working on an article on the Lost Houses. Looks good. --Counter-revolutionary 10:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Talk about fast, thank you that will do brilliantly, profuse thanks - I've just seen a new angle for what could be a dull page. I'm sure though there was a very large neoclassical one too - any ideas what that was called? Giano 10:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There may have been one partly destroyed in the south, I will try and find out for you later.--padraig3uk 10:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Florence Court, which isn't a great house, burnt down - but they restored it. Antrim Castle, which was Massereene and Ferrard's, was burnt by the IRA. There were so many, from south to north. I shall have a look and get back to you. --Counter-revolutionary 10:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - they have to ne in the North though to qualify for this page, actuall Tynan does very well as it was attacked in the 1920 as well as 70s. This page though is pure architecture - politics only appear as a background to explain why house were demolished. Giano 10:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "ne in the North". Yes, Tynan was attacked in the 1920s, there were police stationed at the house as a result. Castlewellan Castle was also damaged by a bomb, as they thought the army were using it. It just took out a rather nice staircase however. Antrim was quite a fine house. --Counter-revolutionary 11:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was also one, I think it was called 'Barnscourt', in Strabane, home of Northern Ireland Senator Barnhill, Blown up by the OIRA in the 70s' the Senator was also killed, that wasn't realy a big house, more a large Georgian mansion.--padraig3uk 10:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you thinking of Drumbanagher, Poyntzpass? It was huge, and in very good order, but the Close's just knocked it down... --Counter-revolutionary 11:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both, they don't have to be huge - just architecturally interesting, country houses, and completely demolished. Barnscourt if Georgian would be great as would Drumbanagher wspecially if its owners just knocked it down, as it show the same thing was happening in Ireland as in England, also it does not make Irish demolitions entirely the fault of The Troubles. I'll see what google does withthose names. Thanks Giano 12:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Senator Jack Barnhills house was called Brickfield House see: [1].--padraig3uk 12:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aha that I was googling it as we speak and having limited results thanks Giano 12:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think you were thinking of the Abercorns at Baronscourt. Drumbanaher was by Playfair (I think) the porte-cochère is still there, and it's about the size of a house itslef. --Counter-revolutionary 13:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I realy want 2 or 3, one destroyed by its owners; one as result of conflict and one other so long as it is interesting - I shall alomost certainly go with Tynan as it is interesting Gothic and attacked twice - then I want a nice example of Irish Georgian of neoclassical and then one other. Research at the moeny is suggesting that Drumbanagher Castle will do as it may have been Neoclassical (looking at Playfairs other works) but i can't find an image yet. Antrim Castle fits the bill but seems to be still standing so is out. Giano 13:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, Antrim's gone. Here it is; [2]. There may be a tower there, but most [all] is gone. Glenarm, where the Earl of Antrim lives - in case that's mixing you up. Also found this book; [3]. I may as well buy a copy, it could help with referencing at some point. I have some photographs of Drumbanagher somewhere. --Counter-revolutionary 13:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Better one on Anrtim; [4]. --Counter-revolutionary 13:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure the front looks very much like this [5] if I were paying £540 a night for this, and got there to find the IRA had blown it up, the IRA would regret it, and find they are no match for the Mafioso. 13:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Positive. That's Glenarm Castle, the Earl of Antrim's seat. They are two different places. No idea why they're calling it "Antrim Castle". --Counter-revolutionary 13:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's the Irish they do it deliberatly to confuse - must make it hard though when getting their on sat-nav. Giano 13:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re Drumbanagher Castle it was often referred to as Drumbanagher House[6]- there is a little about the selling of the estate around 1900 at the bottom of this page [7]- the Poyntzpass and District Local History Society may well have photos of it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A description of it here [8]. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I always knew it as Drumbanagher House, none of this Castle business. I have a quote by the son-in-law of the Close who had it demolished. Say's there was nothing wrong with it, all perfectly fine, but no mortal on earth could upkeep a house of such proportions - now it looks like a nuclear bomb hit it! The family still own the land, as is true of Tyanan Abbey too. --Counter-revolutionary 14:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[9] --Counter-revolutionary 14:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that- but no idea whether the photos still exist now.. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From The Times, January 29, 1903: at Drumbanagher, MAXWELL CHARLES CLOSE, D.L., ex- M.P. county Armagh, in his 76th year, of pneumonia following influenza. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
His son Major Maxwell A Close married Muriel Albany, daughter of the fifth Earl Castle Stewart. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks all of you, but without a free image it is a no go - I'm only assuing it will be palladian or neoclassical, if not it is back to the drawing board. I need two the Gothic we have (which was bombed) the other must have been destroyed by its owner. Any ideas on one anywhere in UK demolished by German bombing? Giano 14:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was neoclassical. I have photographs, I think, but I'll need to look them out...That could take a while. --Counter-revolutionary 14:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great so long as they were taken 70 odd years ago I think they will be allowed unless you took them yourself! Giano 14:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The ought to be around that age. Why should it matter whether I took them/? The house was demolished around '53 I think. --Counter-revolutionary 14:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think age matters as long as the person who took it or their heir is willing to release it under a free license. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All to do with the copyright! If CR took them he can release the copyright, otherwise we have to be sure the copyright owner has been dead for x years or his heirs/owners have to release copyrigt into the public domaine, which is complicated and in my experience more trouble than it is worth, as they always want to release just for wikipedia, which is not allowed, then it all become too complicated and stressfull, ss they never undrstand the logic neither do I for that matter, but there we are. Giano 15:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...nor do I! --Counter-revolutionary 16:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think they have to free to use by anyone as Wikipedia content is used on sites that carry adverts (i.e. commercial sites) like Answers.com and if you start making money from stuff that other people own rights to it creates obvious legal entanglements. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antrim Castle

I'll try and find out more information about Antrim, I know the old Viscount M&F was there at the time, with his parents; rumour has it they chased the IRA away with shot guns. I presume that saved their lives but not the Castle's. It certainly sounds interesting enough; 1921 I believe. --Counter-revolutionary 20:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Info. on Antrim Castle's history --Counter-revolutionary 20:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Antrim Castle fire. Lord Massereene, his family and a house party were present in Antrim Castle when it was burnt by the IRA in 1922. Many items of great historical importance, most notably the Chair of the Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, which was the centrepiece of a venerable, but highly inflammable, 'Oak Room', were destroyed in the fire. But the presence of mind of Lord Massereene and his staff, and the length of time which it takes for a very large house to be consumed by a fire, saved much that would otherwise have been lost. The daughter of the Archbishop of Armagh, who was staying at the time, was nearly lost, but jumped out of a window. A 900-piece, soft paste, 'Etruscan Honeysuckle' dinner service of Foster provenance was thrown from the drawing-room windows into the Six Mile Eater, but few pieced survived the experience, and then only in a battered state. Much furniture, some of it large, was rescued. More would have been rescued, except that the townspeople of Antrim, who turned out in large numbers to help, thought that the most important thing to be saved was the billiard table. Thirty men laboured successfully to get it out of the castle.


Among the major survivals were the family portraits. A comparison with the portraits itemised by C.H. O'Neill in 1860 and those surviving in family possession today, suggests a rescue operation of almost miraculous success (although it has to be remembered that many portraits and other important pieces were probably in the London town house in 1922, or with the Dowager Lady Massereene at her house in Hampshire). Other major survivals were Anthony and John (Speaker) Foster's important collection of pamphlets, which had been in the Antrim Castle library since at least 1863 (when a library catalogue was printed). The Foster papers, which had probably only recently arrived at Antrim Castle, following the sale of Oriel Temple in 1920, survived because they had been placed in the stable block, not in the Castle itself. This possibly accounts for the much lower survival-rate of the Massereene papers.


The late (13th) Viscount Massereene, who was a small boy at the time, had vivid recollections of the fire. He remembered being trapped with his mother in a light well (from which they narrowly escaped, and being told by her that they were going to die there. Most clearly of all, he remembered the nursery cat with its fur on fire.--Counter-revolutionary 20:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good but the page is purely architectural - no interiors - no memories - I know about the Massereenes, and knew Owl House too for a time, but this page is going to be very factual. Giano 20:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As should all pages on wikipedia! I think Antrim Castle would merit its own article though. --Counter-revolutionary 20:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think all those houses there would and one day hopefully will, I have carefully selected them for notable qualities. Giano 20:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An affair in which you are interested is being discussed here. Bishonen | talk 10:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

  • Thanks - I saw. Having seen the standard of wit and comment on David Lauder's page between him and his friends when referring to people they feel oppose their views [10]. I don't think I can be bothered to join the discussion. Fortunately, most people who edit Wikipedia are able to form their own opinions as to whether Doc Glasgow, and I know the difference between a page worth having and one worth deleting. Nothing more to discuss really. This is a modern encyclopedia not the shuttered drawing room, in 1920s Bayswater, of an octogenarian widow of a recently ennobled soap manufacturer - which is what some of the comments I have seen seriously made on Wikipedia in the last 48 hours put me in mind. No doubt we shall soon be warned to look under our beds for Bolsheviks.Giano 12:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...no need to look as far as under the bed. --Counter-revolutionary 13:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I don't think so. Giano 14:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbuthnot articles

Hi Giano, I see you've been redirecting some articles regarding non-notable people in the Arbuthnot family. Personally, I agree that these are best represented by the single article about the Arbuthnot Baronetcy, but I thought it only fair to advise you that there's been some considerable controversy in the past about whether or not a Baronet is in fact notable simply by virtue of being one. There is a body of discussion on the topic already. I'll dig out the appropriate links if you need me to — but if you've already seen and considered them, then no worries, feel free to just ignore this message :) – Kieran T (talk) 16:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is fine I think now it is just a matter of being sensible and doing some tidying up, in fact I eas just following some links from some of those pages to the "Arbuthnot extended family" and wondering of we need such pages as this Frederick Gerard Peake at all. Giano 16:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another AFD up here. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I've seen, can you work out what i have done wrong here [11] why won't Charles Ramsay Arbuthnot display in the lost properly, but appears as a red link at the bottom - foxed me completely! Giano 22:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK - sorted it myself Giano 22:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was just about to say that I'd done it- you need to copy the thing with afd3 on it on the afd box and then paste it at the top. I couldn't believe the thing about the honorary game warden BTW. Curiously he was actually complaining about the elephants being shot, the opposite of what you might expect... Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not bothered about the elephants, it is a sad fact that every other person was big game hunting there at that time, it was politically and socially acceptable so one can't condemn people for doing it, or not, as the case may be. I have just nominated another for deletion as you know, I see Kittybrewster has been banned for 7 days this time, pity it was not for 7 months as that is how long it will probably take to sort out the mess and conflict he has created. Giano 22:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At least in Kenya (and other parts of Arfica) they realise that conservation helps the country- unfortunately the same can't help the tiger in India as I don't imagine many tourists have fun spotting tigers in the forest (and if they do its probably to kill another one). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good job with Mrs Arbuthnot, Giano. I always have misgivings about the candidature process, and generally take articles off my watchlist as soon as they're being FACked with. --Wetman 02:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Wetman - it's nice to see an Arbuthnot at the right end of Wikipedia. Giano 15:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI redux

Just a notice that you are being discussed here. I hope your ears are not burning.--Isotope23 16:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Your efforts in ridding Wikipedia of vanity articles based on half-truths are much appreciated. One Night In Hackney303 22:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, long way to go yet! Giano 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Your comment on Kittybrewster's talk page, shown here, was unwarranted and unhelpful. There's nothing wrong with a civil content dispute, but referring to another editor's work as "the mess you created" is incivil and contributes nothing to resolving the dispute. I urge you to reconsider making such statements in the future. --Hemlock Martinis 01:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • My edit was factual. I withdraw not one word of it. That an editor can edit the same page (Clan Arbuthnott) 32 times on members of his family and then say "What I think is that there is no such thing as Clan Arbuthnott" when he has already created a further 60 odd stubs which other editors are spending time sorting , expanding, deleting is ridiculous. If he wishes to make edits it would be better if he made them to his pages he which does feel exist - most of which are direly in need of help, rather than to pages which yet again others are going to have to sort out in order to maintain Wikipeda's creditability. At present nominating for deletion is the only way of doing this, where they are either deleted (as many have been - or better still improved [12]). All of this is happening with not one jot of help from him. Consequently, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion the man is a menace to the project. This is not a vendetta, or a plot by the IRA and the communist party (as his supporters claims) it is an attempt to sort the mess out which is only being hampered by that editer and a very small band of his friends. Now instead of coming here with your complaints I suggest you go and address some of the more serious accusations coming from Kittybrewster's camp. Giano 07:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not here to discuss your content disagreement, nor whether or not Kittybrewster is a liar, nor your accusations of a cabal. What I am here for is when you call another editor's work "a mess" and then proceed to call that same editor a "menace to the project". That kind of blatant hostility is NOT conducive to content discussions and is never warranted here. Please use a less aggressive tone when talking to other editors. Thank you. --Hemlock Martinis 08:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you go and check some facts. There is no "content disagreement" for there is virtually no content to disagree over. Errors in the work are removed as they are found. I make no accusations that Kittybrewster is a liar - that his work is poorly researched and often erroneous is beyond doubt - that does not make him a liar - unless of course he is deliberately adding rubbish to Wikipedia, which I don't think he is. I make no accusations of cabals either because cabals hold no fear at all for me, in my experience, if one's work is of acceptable standard then no cabal can touch one. In fact Kittybrester's clique is so ignorant of Wikipedia's processes and aims I doubt they re capable of decorating a Christmas tree let alone forming a cabal.

That Kittybrewster's work is a mess is proven by the number of editors currently trying to organize/improve/verify it. There is no "blatant hostility" here merely an attempt to sort things out in a detached and efficient manner, if not agreeing with the "Kitybrewster crowd" is considered hostile, then so be it. Quite frankly, this problem is not helped by comments such as yours by people who only seem to be aware of half the story. If you wish to join or give credence to that rather naive group screaming "terrorists, vendetta, republicans" at those wishing to maintain standards then please do - but please don't bother returning her unless you have something useful or constructive to say in dealing with this matter, as I wish to proceed with something more useful than time-wasting and facetious debate with you. Thank you. Giano 08:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you for 24 hours. I hope that when you return you are able to proceed with your discussions in a more civil manner. --Hemlock Martinis 14:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please tell me this block was for something other than the above comments? Editors are allowed to consider someone's editing poor and in need of being fixed. Friday (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say that I totally disagree with this block, I've been checking through Giano's contribs and I really can't see what you've blocked for. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Referring to someone as a menace to the project is totally inappropriate and definitely well outside the bounds of our civility guidelines. The block is deserved. --Durin 14:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, it's not nice. But you think a block helps? Some people are menaces to the project. (Not saying it applies to anyone in this case as I have no interest in whatever this dispute is about.) Friday (talk) 14:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolutely. Draws a line in the sand and provides a caution to the user that this behavior is not accepted. --Durin 14:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Calling Kittybrewster's work "a mess" might not be everyone's choice of words but it's not a mischaracterization. What on earth are you blocked for? Mackensen (talk) 14:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an extremely misguided block. My only question is whether to unblock summarily or take it to the noticeboard. Newyorkbrad 14:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please lets do this on the noticeboard, and let's discuss for a few min before we jump to unblock. Although, I suspect that's what is needed.--Docg 14:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Commented there. Newyorkbrad 14:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could we have a link to the "noticeboard" please? For the record, I also think this block is an over-reaction. Sure, there is the potential for these comments to be read as uncivil, but at the same time, there's the possibility that they are factually accurate, in the sense that there is a definition of the word "mess"... – Kieran T (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Giano blocked. Newyorkbrad 14:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool heads

OK, I've opened a thread on ANI and asked for the blocking admin to exlain himself. Let's no-one rush to judgement here. Please let's keep perspective and sort this.--Docg 14:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, he's been unblocked. Let's just leave it at that.--Docg 14:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded with my reasons for blocking on the AN/I page. --Hemlock Martinis 23:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. I have responded. I'd ask all parties now to move on and deal with the underlying content issues.--Docg 23:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Giano, thanks for staying reasonably cool over the blocking. I'm not getting into the rights and wrongs, but the usually rhetorical explosion everyone gets into (on both sides) is ....well... a bit dull now?--Docg 08:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You rang? El_C 08:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I got the right number! El_C 08:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't think so EL C, perhaps you have the wrong number. Thanks Doc I completely agree with you, I am in fact very cool, ice cold in fact. I'm not scared off easily so it is back to work on this matter. I've given my views on Kittybrewster's proposed solution here [13]. I'm really pleases by how much some of the pages are improved by a spell on AFD - it's amazing the knowledge there is on Wikipedia when one can tap into it. What concerns me though is not the pages which are seemingly obvious candidates for AFD it those that are not. What errors are buried deep in those - the problem is it would be such a bore to have to trawl through them all. I still like my idea of a panel of Arbs and respected admins but I suspect volunteers would be thin on the ground. Perhaps Harriet Arbuthnot being on the main page will encourage others to research this fascinating family - we may even get some more information on her - I did knock her out quite hurriedly.

Finally, thank you to the many people who commented yesterday. I appreciated every comment. I was very surprised by some of the people who did speak on my behalf - I actually missed the show live but watching the recorded highlights was very interesting and revealing. I must be doing something right. Thanks all of you. Giano 08:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bit late with a comment to this. What a pity that I have been busy in Russian Wikipedia all day. Some people would like to leave their mark on block logs. You know, look at me, I blocked Jimbo Wales, look at how important I am. Something along these lines, I believe. This will continue as long as we have block logs in perpetuity. The issue of perennial and sacred block logs is being discussed in an ongoing arbitration case, by the way. I advise you to take the latest incident lightly. --Ghirla-трёп- 19:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ghiirla, I gave it the consideration it deserved. Giano 23:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get some advice?

Hi Giano. I'm a long-time lurker on this site, usually just reading about things that interest me and fixing minor typos and such. I came upon an article (Wounded Knee incident) that I really think needs a complete re-write and I would appreciate your advice on how to go about it. I've noticed that you often do a lot of writing on one of your subpages and then put the article in the main space. To fix this page, should I copy and paste the Wounded Knee incident page into a subpage under my name where I can work on it at my leisure? I would then re-write it completely, fixing all the citations and such. Would I then copy and paste it back into the mainspace article or how does that work? I also don't want to get into an editing war with previous editors of that page, so should I announce my intentions on the talk page first? Any advice you can give me would be appreciated. --SGT Tex 18:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You first create the page User:SGT Tex/Wounded Knee incident then paste in the existing page and re-write it, privately in user space, then when you have finished just paste your new page back into main space, and announce it as a re-write in the edit summary. Take note though of any useful information which may be added to the page between these stages. So it is probably a good idea to announce on the talk page what you are doing, so others don't waste their time. The problems arise if anyone else edits the page in your use space (which they should not do without an invitation)then you cannot just past back because you would lose other peoples credits in the history - so you ask a friendly admin to merge the history pages. It is quite simple really. Giano 23:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks! --SGT Tex 02:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inigo Jones

Do you know anything about his original St Paul's, Covent Garden? Specifically I'm wondering whether the clock had any decoration or whether Hogarth has added it to this image to make a point. Yomanganitalk 00:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • To be honest I know very little, bit the first paragraph concerns me as in 1631 the Ist Duke of Bedford was only 15 and was not to be Ist Duke of Bedford for another 78 years. However his family did own that area so there is likely a connection but the area would have been owned by The 4th Earl of Bedford in 1616 (not Earl not a Duke). The epidemic that swept London in 1665 is generally referred to as Bubonic plague or just The Plague rather than Black death. Thirdly according to our page here Pygmalion opened at Her Majesty's Theatre. I would be very surprised if a play would open in a Church porch in London - very surprised indeed. As for the avenue of Star's I think that was one of London's five minute tourist wonders. Giano 15:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't noticed how poor the article was (as it didn't say anything about the clock I ignored the rest). Two seconds of googling revealed that you are correct, it was commissioned by Francis Russell, 4th Earl of Bedford, but I think the "opening" was just referring to the opening scene not the opening performance. I've corrected it anyway as it was unclear at best. Yomanganitalk 00:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it is because the flat clock couldn't be seen as it is recessed so he used artistic license and put a sticky-out clock there instead? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 15:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure whether the clock that is there now is the original, there was a fire in 1795 which destroyed part of the walls, and this undated sketch shows a sticky-out clock, and though it lacks the figure of Father Time and the inscription shown by Hogarth, this undated but probably earlier sketch looks like it has something adorning the clock. Anyway, enough clock-based discussion, I shall go away and try to discover "the truth". Yomanganitalk 00:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have found an architectural drawing that show a boxy clock protruding with sculpture above - [14] - and another with very different detailing - [15]. New images will be arriving shortly. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inigo Jones' St. Paul's had perished in the Great Fire. Hogarth knew it only from engravings: what's to be discovered is which engravings, and what use did he make of them, because no one within living memory had seen Jones's Paul's. --Wetman 20:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure? I thought Covent Garden escaped the Great Fire, and I haven't seen anything that mentions the church burning until 1795. There's this rather jolly picture of Londoners waving it goodbye. Hatton recorded the inscription on the clock as Ex hoc Momento pendat Eternitas in New View of London in 1708 but doesn't mention the figure above. I found a good deal of information on it at British History Online [16], I'll go and update the article eventually. (And if some Latin scholar can give the correct translation of that inscription I'd be grateful...From the Moment hangs Eternity? sounds a bit odd to me. Let's see...Amo, amas, amat.) Yomanganitalk 23:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oop. St Paul's Covent Garden. Jones did some work on St. Paul's Cathedral, which did perish. Ignore me.--Wetman 03:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I despair of this site

Your recent edit to Arbuthnot (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 18:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First civility, and now vandalism! One Night In Hackney303 18:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cut it out 1NIH, I despair of this site, what the hell is going on when even some ignorant bot is now revert warring. I'm going out for the evening. When I get back the owner of that bloody bot had better have it sorted! Giano 18:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, have a good night! One Night In Hackney303 18:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please note Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sir William Arbuthnot-Lane, 2nd Baronet and an important test case for non notable peers Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Arbuthnot, 6th Viscount of Arbuthnott. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 08:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another one from the same family (spelt wrong) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Arbuthnot (politician). The first Viscount didn't exactly set a good precendent for notability- given a title by a desperate King who shortly after had his head chopped off. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 09:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article award

The Featured Article Medal
I was pleased to see that another article you are the primary contributor to has been on the main page as today's featured article. Good job. MONGO 21:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


And here. Have some home-made fudge [17]--Docg 21:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mongo, and a present from Doc - how kind I love.....choke, splutter cough.......Giano 13:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the help with "Eyes of the Insane", which is much appreciated. I'm going to have to read up on key changes etc. and brush up my skills in that department. LuciferMorgan 08:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help - you may find it is not something you can learn in a hurry but good luck. Giano 12:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thought this might interest you if you haven't seen it- it was built by George Keith, 5th Earl Marischal for whom I just made an article (someone who was actually notable). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 15:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article described it as Scottish Baronial style- I don't think that's right is it? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 19:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking at the building in this photograph Image:Keith front.jpgno it is not strictly Scottish baronial but I can understand why it has been called that. My impression from just looking at the house suggest from the differing window height an old house 16th century probably that has been much altered, the left hand wing being the older, the tower with the conical roof terminating the older section. The entrance section and building to the right is probably 18th or more probably 19th century as is the uppermost story of the tower and it's roof. someone in the early 19th century made a valiant attempt at unifying the features on a restricted budget - but the whole effect is quite pleasing in a Scottish sort of way - it probably is a loose sort of Scottish baronial, I certainly would not revert the statement that it was Scottish baronial. There is a nice little section of Renaissance ballustrading in there too suggesting French/Scottish 16th century architecture, but I suspect that may be 19th century faux. This is all my guess from looking at the image, I am quite prepared to stand corrected. Giano 22:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Giano, it certainly doesn't seem to be Scottish Baronial [in the strict sense]. --Counter-revolutionary 01:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the term Scottish Baronial was interpreted differently by different architects. It was not a strict application (like neo-classicism). Sometimes a full make-over of an existing building could not be afforded and so it ended up in different styles. Regards, David Lauder 07:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your responses- it turns out the person that authored the article User talk:Brendandh actually lived there for 15 years, the house having been bought by his step grandfather in the 50s just before a farmer was going to rip the roof off- see his response to me about the architectural aspects and historyhere. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 20:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's just fine and dandy Gustav, but which of us is winning the prize for identifying the feature? - more to the point what is the prize - money I hope! Giano 20:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What she knows, Giano knows....
Well, I was going to point out that your description agreed almost exactly with User:Brendandh's but I thought your ego might explode, however here's a special award that I just created... Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Moi? Ego? I am mortified that you could say such a thing - poor old Mona I always thiught she was a miserable looking woman - probably hormonal. Giano 21:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
She look's a bit better in the Dulwich version. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford

I have dug out my (very old) matriculation documents and it appears you may be correct in that upon application I could have made an application years later for an automatic MA, a sort of upgrading of the BA upgraded. Either I had forgotten that or I am just getting old and demented. I telephoned my brother who was at Baliol and he said "of course, you know that!" But I don't remember that at all, I'm afraid. So my full and profuse apologies to you. I had returned 12 years after graduating and studied for a MA in a different subject. I had to apply for acceptance and all my work was assessed. Maybe I am confused. I don't mean to be abrasive but I don't think the internet is the most brilliant form of communication and people's comments often appear very aggressive and rude. One responds accordingly, although one should not. Regards, David Lauder 07:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we are all a little more forthright than we would be face to face in real life. However, at the moment (in real life) I am writing to the Head Traffic Warden (or whatever he calls himself) for the Borough of Kensington and Chelsea - and if you think I have been forthright or even ascerbic to you - you "aint" seen nothing! Giano 08:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have taken on that council before and also Westminster council. You must fight your corner against these local authority tyrants who represent nobody. David Lauder 09:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Broadwater Farm

(Crossposted to assorted "people I've run into and whose opinions I respect")

I realise it's totally outside your field, but if you get the chance could you take a look at the article on Broadwater Farm I've recently created? I do think it deserves it's own article - yes, it might be most famous for events that happened 22 years ago, but having it as a redirect to Broadwater Farm riot seems to me as ludicrous as redirecting Germany to World War II or Northern Ireland to IRA. However, now I've set up incoming links it's likely to be a beacon for POV-pushing, so I'd like to get opinions on (a) what a NPOV will be on something like this where the two POVs are likely to be diametric opposites, (b) whether you think it can/will ever be stable (and whether it's worth trying to keep stable) and (c) how much of a focus ought to be on the riots as opposed to the place itself. If any of you feel the urge I'd also appreciate anyone who feels able/willing putting it on their watchlists, as I suspect it's going to be heavily vandalised & spammediridescenti (talk to me!) 00:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I really do not have any opinion at all on this subject. Giano 11:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surprise

Funny how there has been a steady stream of "Keeps" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Arbuthnot, 6th Viscount of Arbuthnott since 14, 5 June 2007 when User:Kittybrewster posted a little note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Peerage#AfD_of_peer. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 15:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scandalous. The right way to conduct a "test case" to free up a project's articles for deletion is to keep them in the dark until after you've finished managing the vote. (I found the AfD without the aid of that note, BTW.) Choess 15:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unless that note could be countered by a note at a Wikiproject where the opposite vote can be taken for granted to be canvassed from a group of the same size that is likely to have the opposite opinion I think it is clear that that action will skew the afd from being a true reflection of community consensus. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 16:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The reason AfD is not a vote is so that the closing admin can have broad latitude to disallow arguments solely based on WP:ILIKEIT or WP:IDONTLIKEIT when determining consensus. There's no reason we should forgo the expertise of WikiProject Members in order to eliminate their emotional involvement when AfD already has a mechanism (admin discretion) to eliminate purely emotional arguments. AfD does not need a Fairness Doctrine. Choess 23:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More Kitty Kanvassing!

This messege here is canvassing per WP:CANVAS because the messege is notneutral since he shows his view that "it is notable". Now this guy has had many warnings for canvassing but now that be blanks his page no admin can see the previous warnings. Now I for one think that if an editor chooses to blank/hide his history then they should already be treated with suspicion and especially if they have already recieved warnings. What course of action should/can be taken!?--Vintagekits 16:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well you all have two choices: (I) Put up and shut up; or (II) Make a case and present it to the Arbcom. I personally am sick of all these silly antics and am ignoring it all. I could write 3 million pages or so on every minor "nobile dei" but I have not the inclination or the energy nor do I frankly care about them or the people who hold them in such high esteem. Wikipedia is huge, it is not running out of space let the editorship decide what sort of encyclopedia they want. I for one am not editing a social register. Now if you will excuse me I have some pages to work on. Giano 22:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yup. As much as the Arbuthnot articles are mostly crap - there's plenty of total crap out there if you really want to delete something. If the basic information is verifiable, then /shrug/. The guy is a noble nonentity, ergo there's no more information in the sources because he's probably done nothing else, so the article will always be a stub, but who really cares? Why not go fix up the article on a more important biography, like Paris Hilton instead? (By the way, it really is a mess)--Docg 23:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Further to that, if you want something to put the Arbuthnot articles in perspective, you can always come join the sort through the 4500 articles a bot's just dumped in Category:Stubs, roughly ⅓ of which are being prodded or speediediridescenti (talk to me!) 23:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judgement

"Merging is sensible" Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Arbuthnot, 6th Viscount of Arbuthnott. I presume therefore this applies equally to all other aristocrats where the only only notable thing on them is something about undercharging rent on the family estate (or equivalent). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, merge away! One Night In Hackney303 21:26, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be quite frank the whole Arbuthnot business now sends me to sleep. Someone who loves titles should starts a new series category: Counts of Ciampino that should be fascinating. There must be 100s who could go in that all as un-notable as the last. Yawn, please no one post anything further on non-notable titled people on this page. Giano 23:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are notable for having been ennobled in an Airport, no?
"The Italian Kings last act at Rome’s Ciampino Airport, when he was about to go into exile as a result of WWII, was significant in the history of title creations. Some 200 “Counts of Ciampino” were created that day. A crowd of loyal supporters were waving a last good-bye to their king. At the time the king was giving some last instructions to a financial attaché, he said “fa i conti” (do the accounts) while he was waving back to the crowd. But his appointments secretary standing on the other side of him understood an alternate translation of “ fa i conti” (make them counts)...and he erroneously did make each of them a count!"[18]. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 00:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh very well researched Gustav, I have started the new series here with Count Bianchi di Ciampino anyone wishing to add informative and useful information on this remarkable man and his interesting life may do so - feel free and help yourselves - I see the possibility of a new FA looming. Please all of you expend your energies concerning notable titled people on that page not here. ThanksGiano 07:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I will attempt to add to this illustrious history over the weekend- looks like I'll have to brush up on my Italian too! Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 02:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, my friend

You are trolling for a block. Stop it, now. Get a sense of proportion. There are other battles to fight. This is old. Moreschi Talk 11:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not call me a troll, there are no edits on that page that are not true. Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins is a page anyone can edit, so I am edoting it. There is no rubbish there it is all true fact. IRC Admins can either live with the facts or prove what I'm saying there is true. Giano 11:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know you're not a troll, but right now you are trolling. You are deliberately wasting time and self-evidently faking the record. Moreschi Talk 11:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How on earth is editing a page wasting time and what is faked - exactly in my edits - I think you will find everything I have said is true - not even one single exageration. I'm afraid allwikipedia pages must be true we cannot make exceptions for admins who like to chatteron IRC Giano
I see the trumpet has sounded and they are all dutifully trooping out now to revert - I particularly love this edit summary [19] what on earth have negros to do with it? I think we are entering the realms os sensationalism to keep the page how IRC admins want it. Giano 11:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear poor Luna [20] is really worried about this. Giano 11:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I really would like to be able to get along with you. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I really have a problem assuming good faith with you after after your cheap comment about negros when you know perfectly well what a Fairy refers to, and the term IRC fairy has been around for ages. Don't try to get clever with me and try to sensationalise my edits. You don't want to talk about it is up to you, go some place else then. I do want to talk about IRC. Before I edited it I have never in all my years on Wikipedia seen such a blatant and one sided piece of propaganda,and that it was edited by those same admins who run the channel is shameful and a disgrace. That people as usual when this subject come up try to silence me says more than I ever could. That the page is, I expect shortly to be protected, as it was before I got my hands on it - lowers Wikipedia and gives ammunition to its enemies. Giano 12:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Surely you're aware by now of the history of the term "IRC fairy." It's not an innocent saying. It is, in my mind, a hateful thing to say. I do believe that some of the things you mentioned could and probably should be mentioned at the wikipedia-en-admins page, but just as I have an obvious conflict of interest, so do you -- neither of us are really neutral, outside parties in this, and it would be disingenous for either of us to pretend otherwise. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What on earth is so bad about an IRC Fairy, there are loads of them sitting about all day being frightfully importants and never editing a page. Anyway as you agree the term exists so it should be explained on the page concerned. I did not start that page. I have never once been on IRC so I have no COI - why do you think I should? Giano 12:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the phrase has been used to badger several editors off of this project, some of whom I considered good friends, and I'm very hurt that you toss them aside with such a cavalier attitude. As for your other claim, I should hope that even you recognize that a passionate user is probably not a neutral user. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your channel has driven more editors off wikipedia than anythng else. Established editors who don't just quite toe the lone to certain IRC admins are blocked following discussions there, othere was case only recently - or did you not know about that? Giano 12:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not "my channel," I'm just one user in that channel. Similarly, this is not "my Wikipedia," I am just one user. I do agree that there have been problems, even serious ones. I personally would like to do more to resolve these issues. I do not feel, however, that harassment and arguing -- by any set of users -- are the best way to solve the problems we should all be facing together. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
well go and write about some of thos problems on that glowing whiter than white page - that no one is allowed to edit honestly. Don't tell me about them, I know all there is to know about that bloody channel. I and my friends have all been blocked as the results of the spite and inhabits that place. I won't be commenting for an hour now, as I expect one of the IRCAdmins is already cooking up the famous " IRC cool off block" to shut me up. What a shower. You must be so proud of them. Giano 12:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You claim to have hundreds of logs, and to know everything there is to know about the channel. How is it, then, that you seem to believe I am your enemy? – Luna Santin (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Last comment for a while: Quick hurry over there, you and your friends have forgotten to remove some of my edits to the lead - Quickly, someone may see them Giano 12:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really trying to understand your position, here. Why are you being so hostile to me? – Luna Santin (talk) 13:00, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a lot of things but never racist [21] If you knew the page was not telling the whole truth why not sort it yourself? No you aand the others just read it and let it remain as a piece of propaganda. Just look at the fuss when it was edited, is any other wiki page so POV and biased and whiter than white. Giano 13:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't intended to accuse you in that way, only to convey how deeply hurtful I feel the phrase is -- I apologize for the miscommunication on my part. For the rest, I actually had no idea that page existed, before tonight, and to be honest, I'm still not sure why it does. Provided a reasonable compromise can be reached, I would be happy to collaborate on a description of issues related to the channel. – Luna Santin (talk) 13:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please maintain civility

Please try to maintain civility, and please do not make comments that could be viewed as personal attacks. To avoid any confusion, I am referring to these edits: "Many users do not comport themselves in a collegial manner...", "Kelly Martin is not an admin, having given up her adminship voluntarily 'under a cloud'...", "while many admins use it responsibly others do not...", "the channel is regarded by some editors as the Lubyanka of Wikipedia...". Further, this could easily be regarded as a snide attack against David Gerard, even if that is not what you intended. And this could easily be regarded as a sarcastic aside against Kelly Martin, even if that is not what you intended. We must be sensitive to how others will perceive what we say, even if we are commenting in good faith. --bainer (talk) 13:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken - everything there is true. Now pLease refer to my comment above "I won't be commenting for an hour now, as I expect one of the IRCAdmins is already cooking up the famous " IRC cool off block" to shut me up." Now please take that message back whence you came. Giano 13:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not using IRC, I noticed your initial post to WP:ANI since I have that page on my watchlist. I would urge you to take what I have said into consideration - we all must be sensitive to how others will perceive our statements. I am of course not asserting that you intended to be offensive, but the edits I have referred to are easily capable of being understood that way. Please refrain from making any more uncivil statements. --bainer (talk) 13:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have not made one uncivil statement, or said anything that is not the truth! If wikipedia chooses to have whiter than white page on the Admins channel then so be it. I call it propaganda and rubish. Now it seems no one who is not a fully paid up memeber of IRCadmins can edit that page so I call that COI. You seem a little oversensitive so perhaps you had better overt your eyes from that page. Giano 13:23, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have suggested in your recent edits that "Many users do not comport themselves in a collegial manner...", that "Kelly Martin is not an admin, having given up her adminship voluntarily 'under a cloud'...", that "while many admins use it responsibly others do not..." and so on. As I said, while you may not have intended these remarks to be offensive, they are clearly capable of causing offence. As such, I urge you to refrain from making further similar statements. --bainer (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have just edited the page concerned with a reference. Now which of the above statements is not true? It is a wikipedia page on an important wikipedia subject it is important it is factually accurate and correct. Now whicj is not true? Giano 13:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is not what you are saying but the manner in which you choose to say it. In these edits, you make the accurate observation that there are no formal processes relating to access to the channel, but you do it while making snide remarks about David Gerard. Several other users have offered to work with you to help you make these observations in a civil fashion, and I urge you to accept their offers. Further edits like the one I have just cited will only result in a block. --bainer (talk) 14:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, could you please back off on this page for a day or two to defuse any unnecessary unhappiness on a fine Saturday morning/afternoon. I will try later today to add a couple of sentences to the article which try to address the substance of your concerns without getting into personalities. Newyorkbrad 13:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brad Hi, - there is no problem I am just planning to remove a little POV and add some background to the page with references. I may even make it a FA. Thanks for the interest though, any help always welcome - "This is the encyclopedia anyone can edit" - Cheers Giano 13:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]