User talk:Giano

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:GiacomoReturned)
Jump to: navigation, search


RETIRED
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

I have been of the opinion for some time that editing Wikipedia and my real life are not compatible or at times prudent or fair to either. I find myself unable to confine myself to edits concerning bricks and mortar which would be very dull for all concerned; therefore, I have made the decision to cease editing and retire. It won’t be easy after over ten years, but I shall find other things to do, perhaps even improve my golf swing (unlikely) and play more cricket (very likely) which will be unfortunate for one village team in the South of England - it is summer after all, so let's enjoy it. My esteemed aunt will be similarly retiring, but in her case, to the South of France to play high stake bridge. To those I’ve offended over the years: I’m sorry and hope you get over it and aren't too happy to see the back of me. To those few who I haven’t upset: Well it’s all been quite fun hasn't it? But (Eric says it's OK to start a sentence with "but") all good things must come to an end. Hopefully, my good friends will keep this page tidy, just because I’ve gone it's no excuse to relax our war on bots, zealots and the merely tiresome, and my main user page can stay too, it was created for me by a very clever editor and I think it's rather attractive. I can't think of anything else to say (no doubt I will the moment I've scrambled the password, but that'll be too bad - so keep smiling, I shall miss you. Giano (talk) 12:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

 
Domus G.jpg
  • Miss you. Sad enough to miss the "very clever editor" you mention, buried in an urn there, and an image by him in memory on my talk page (no, not the ballerina who died), - now I miss another very clever and precious editor, you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • May you have a very happy retirement Giano. On the few occasions we have met, I have agreed with everything you have had to say. I regard you as a very skilled wordsmith and a very good editor. Selfishly, of course, I hope you emerge from retirement in the next few months or so, but I fully understand your reasons not to. It's been a pleasure. CassiantoTalk 17:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I am saddened by your departure but I understand why you are leaving. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 19:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Best of luck in the real world, I am sure you would never expect me to say this but you have done a lot of good things for Wikipedia. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Truly a loss to the project, but I do wish you and your esteemed aunt the safest and most enjoyable of travels. It has been an honor to have made your acquaintance Giano. I do hope that one day you will return, but either way - may you be happy always.. — Ched :  ?  05:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yup, it would be good to bring back the FA producing Giano from 2005 period, but understandable given the way the site is run. I wish you all the best and hope at some point you'll regain your original enthusiasm. I saw a glimmer of it in Florence Nagle which has now passed FA. I can now say I contributed to an FA with Giano, but as Eric says, Sagaciousphil really deserves much of the credit. I won't forget anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Giano, this is a sad loss to the project. I look at Jolly Farmer and think the bounder and cad known as William "Golden Farmer" Davies would have been just the sort of character you'd want to write about. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
It is indeed a sad loss, and I am still gone, but I do not forget why I left. Giano (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Private Apartments of the Winter Palace has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

Your comment at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard[edit]

Calling a Wikipedian a "fool" is a personal attack no matter how you slice it. Please maintain decorum on arbitration pages and across Wikipedia. Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 19:08, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

A fool is a fool whoever an wherever he may be User talk:L235 ; and you should be more concerned about acting promptly when far worse and libellous attacks are made on people who may not be Wikipedians. As it is, your so called Arbitration Committee took God knows how many weeks to come up with findings that could have been easily determined within 30 minutes of the libel first being made. So do not presume to come here talking of decorum. Giano (talk) 19:58, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Giano, do not reinstate the personal attacks. You are advised that arbitration clerks may sanction users for conduct on arbitration pages, in accordance with the clerks' procedures and arbitration policy. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 20:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
L235, wind your neck in. Even by the standards of Arbcom clerks, you're coming across as prissily self important here. I happen to think Giano is wrong in this particular case, but if "fool" is really such a dire insult you're prepared to edit-war over it, you come out of it looking like a, well, fool. Since Beeblebrox has previously posted "fuck off you petty fascist idiot", I imagine he can cope with being called "fool" without reaching for the smelling-salts. – iridescent 20:14, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I'd rather be called a fool than "you uncivil little editor" (both hasn't happened to me), and I still believe that it's not certain "bad words" that cause incivility but spirit - or lack of it. - Giano: nice to see your name on my watchlist ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Nice to see you too Gerda, but I'm not editing, just seeing this through to the end, and seeing if anything has changed here. It appears not - silly people continuing to impose their silly opinions while promoting even sillier people to positions they know not how to occupy. I shall stay away. Giano (talk) 21:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
It's marvellous to see you haven't completely abandoned us, Excellency. Personally, I don't think Beelebrox is a fool - he's proven himself one of the better Arbs, elsewhere - but I accept we all have different standards of tolerance of occasional foolish behaviour. I should also own up that my favourite Shakespearean role was Lear's Fool. Nevertheless, L235, please take the advice of an old fool: threatening sanctions to a retired editor does make you look like a ... what's the word I'm looking for? --RexxS (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I suppose I should copy an email I sent to Iridescent, when I didn't know how high-profile this talk page was and thought Iridescent would be the only outside reply:
Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 22:23, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
In case of doubt about profile, look up the list of the Precious, - this one even has a red category, shown on Christmas Day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
In fairness, that list includes some of Wikipedia's most notorious vandals, sockmasters, POV-pushers and general whackadoodles, so I wouldn't take it very seriously. A better indication of how many talk-page watchers are going to chime in on any given thread is to see whether the page on which you're commenting appears on Wikipedia:Database reports/Most-watched users.

L235, seeing as I was one of the seventeen people who originally ratified ArbPol (the lone abstainer was some guy called "Chase Me Ladies, I'm the Cavalry", incidentally) you can safely assume I'm aware of what Arbcom's policies say. What I (and everyone else) is questioning here isn't whether it's appropriate to revert and warn in the case of genuine personal attacks, but whether it could be considered reasonable to consider "fool" a sanctionable attack. It's clear from the context that Giano is saying he considers Beeblebrox's opinion foolish. FWIW I agree with Beeblebrox in this particular case (I don't think it's reasonable to claim that any rational voter went into the polling station thinking "I support Conservative policies, but now I see that a relative obscure Conservative minister has been accused of allowing a member of his staff to edit his Wikipedia page without declaring the conflict of interest, I'm a sudden convert either to socialism or to extremist nationalism") so Giano is by implication calling me a fool as well, but there's no way on earth I'd consider it an insult rising to the level where the "Maintaining good order and format on arbitration cases" clause kicks in. – iridescent 10:23, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

In fairness, my list is my personal POV, and I never claimed it to be "serious". I looked at the other "indication" and smiled, seeing some names you may have meant there also - including my own. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It's a very nice list Gerda. @ Iridescent and L235: I hadn't seen that page before; how very humbling to realise that here are 450 people of who one has never heard who have pages more frequently watched than one's own. However, that is not the point, clerks and what-not should not going stomping about the encyclopedia posting in consideration of how many people may or may not see their posts. I'm not so sure you are correct about the electorate's voting Iridescent. Were I am undecided, hovering voter, I may well be swayed after learning that one candidate is a devious liar prone to altering and manipulating the truth - you have to remember that in England (theoretically at least) the electorate votes for the individual MP of their home constituency - not the political party as a whole. Giano (talk) 12:11, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • In Shapps's particular case, I can't really see it; since it was already demonstrably on the record that he'd been caught out using fake names and lying about it, presumably any constituent who felt this was an issue had already made their minds up about him. The newspaper in question in this case was the Guardian, whose readers it can reasonably be assumed were not going to support Shapps in any case. (Statement of the obvious, but Shapps won with a 12,153 majority—that was down on 2010, but the drop is almost certainly accounted for by the surge for the fringe parties across the whole of England. I have a very low opinion of Shapps, who I think embodies the spivvy wide-boys who are the least likeable faction within the post-Bliar Conservative and Labour parties, but he won fair and square.) – iridescent 12:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Indeed he did; but whatever the losses to him or whatever sort of person he may or may not be, Wikipedia and its officers should not be giving false, misleading or defamatory information here or in any other forum. Giano (talk) 08:44, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For bravery and integrity during the Contribsx ArbCom case. Vordrak (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


Biography Barnstar Hires.png The BLP Barnstar
For commitment to the truth and integrity during the Contribsx ArbCom case. Vordrak (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Private Apartments of the Winter Palace[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Terrific article. Thank you for writing it. -- Y not? 20:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Shoes[edit]

Any idea where I can find an image or two of pigache / pigaciae? I can't find any on Commons and I like to dress up. Wikiombudsman (talk) 16:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)