User talk:Giano II/archive 15

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Bugger the Wikibreak[edit]

For anyone in need of amusement, I strongly recomend [1] as good fun reading. These were the people and attitudes running us then - has anything changed? I see quite a few familiar names. To any female editor here who thinks that my esteemed aunt is a sock created for the denigration and humiliation of women, I do not appologise because I know few women (or men) who are that stupid - actually in RL, I don't any people that stupid. Her satire and sense of humour is directed at any pomposity - most people with the exception of the Arbcom are intelligent enough to appreciate that. She is the charectorisation of a certain type of English lady, a declining few of whom still exist, who are usually held in affectionate exasperation by all who know them - she is actually based on a real and sadly, recently deceased person. Anyway, enjoy your read, but remember some people might not find it as amusing as others [2]. Giacomo Returned 19:04, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

(Shrug.) If the fabrications of FT2 are whipped up with those of Elonka,[3] what do you expect, meringue? I think it was, and remains, unlikely to be something sweet. Bishonen | talk 21:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC).
I think we have more of an Eton mess - a sweet confection designed to hide rotten fruit. However, I still have a problem beleiving that the arbcom were so igorant, stupid and devious. In fact, I don't think they were, they just sat their feeding off each other from one height of stupidity to the next - any excuse to block me, did they really think the community would swallow it or were they so far up themselves that they had lost sight of reality? I don't know, but I do know that everything I have always said has been true. Giacomo Returned 21:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

After all the shit, I have taken from the arbcom over the years, at last the truth is outing: this is from when I posted just how stupid and nasty they really could be after they fell for some complete rubbish and then tried to cover it up:

They blocked one of the project's best editors by mistake claiming he was an evil troll; had I not exposed it he would have stayed blocked. Of that dreadful block our glorious leader said:

Am I in the minority here in that I view the bad block as basically no big deal?


p.s. Separately, I think the sleuthing <that caused the "bad block"> was pretty good, other than the assumption of bad faith that permeates it

So the bastards blocked me instead for pointing out haw daft they were;

"I have been wanting to issue a general announcement of a crackdown on civility, taking out several obvious difficult users at once as a form of "green light" for others to do the same, but have also been persuaded that me doing it might send the opposite signal: that such actions require an extraordinary intervention. Giano would have been a nice test case, had it been done by an ordinary admin, rather than Cary using his office account.

This is the most extraordinary thread [4] and case of wanting to shoot the messenger, to save their own faces and skins. What a horrible shower Jimbo and his arbcom of 2007 were and they even tried to oversight it all - probably succeeded - who knows. Hiding behind their secret lists. Quite, quite repulsive and nauseating. Angry barely begins to describe this - I wonder what Coren is saying - am I still "paranoid"? Giacomo Returned 21:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

You sound surprised. What did you think they were scheming in their secret places? This obsession with civility by the casually incivil like Jimbo Wales and his hangers-on is an extraordinary feature of this project, and one that will undoubtedly hasten its demise. They're like a bunch of old women at a knitting club with their back-stabbing gossiping. Malleus Fatuorum 22:02, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Succeeded? Not at all. For example, "Secret mailing list rocks Wikipedia" and "Inside, Wikipedia is more like a sweatshop than Santa's workshop". More like an "own goal". Their own actions propelled a minor misstep into the news (and note the attacks on you were specifically mentioned) -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 22:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

"including comparing them to Hitler and Goebbels, then we should not be surprised at the kind of culture we get as a result. Just to be sure I am clear: I will not act separately or in contradiction to the arbcom in the matter of Giano, period. I make my comments as encouragement for those members of the committee inclined to go easy on Giano to at least rethink it one good time.


Regarding the above: I have never compared any Wikipedian (or anyone else for that matter) to "Hitler and Goebbels." These are just a few of the lies told by these people. Giacomo Returned 22:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

"..., but it is pretty ugly shit that Giano posted.

Fred (Bauder)

Giano posted Durova's "evidence". I wouldn't call her evidence "ugly shit", but it is clearly flimsy and unconvincing.

Paul August


Giacomo, I'm having trouble figgering who says what in the passages Malice Aforethought posts — the replies to replies to replies to replies reach down to the centre of the earth. Do you know which arb (or former arb) relieved himself of this disgusting lie, just in passing?

"Has the document been certified undoctored by the original sender? Giano's track record on post-editing earth-shattering revelations is not great."

I think it's David Gerard talking, but not sure. Whoever it was clearly has no shame. Notice that the reliable Paul August contradicted that character assassination of you by comparing your posted logs and e-mails with others: of course they were exactly the same. Honestly, what's the point of reading such stuff, though? It's not exactly news. (Unlike the Jimbo/Bishonen case, which I gather is next...) Bishonen | talk 21:48, 12 July 2011 (UTC).

Yes, that should be very interesting reading, but what is important is that people like Coren and Shell Kinny and their Arb cohorts still like to perpetuate the myth (openly on wikipedia) that I am a paranoid who does not know what I am talking about. Not one of the present Arbs picked him up on that post for which others would have been banned. The more one reads these leaks, the more it seems the reverse may be true. Giacomo Returned 21:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Bish, I believe it was David Gerard who said that. He signed all his other messages with "d." Tex (talk) 14:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
No surprise. Thank you, little manager. Please feed "d." to Bishzilla as remedy. Bishonen | talk 16:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC).

Yes, just another lie that Kyril Loshkin and co were either too stupid, ignorant or devious to repudiate. How they dare to remain on the Arbcom now that we can see them for what they are God only knows. Still paranoid am I Coren and Shell? Giacomo Returned 17:19, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Country houses[edit]

As you are interested in country houses just to let you know I've started List of country houses in the United Kingdom. I'd be grateful if ever you start a missing article on a country houses to add it to the list.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I had noticed that you and friends have been busy recatatgorising most of the pages that I have edited - there are not many new house pages to start these days; it's more a matter of expanding what is already there, but I will bear it in miind. Giacomo Returned 17:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I can always spot the articles you've written!! Funny but they seem to follow a pattern. Usually when you think hey this is surprisingly good quality it turns out to be yours! Undoubtedly there are many missing notable houses but quality really needs to improve on most of them..vhich houses in Greater London would quality for being included in this list? The list is really historic houses, I think Chiswick and other such houses with gardens in London can be included, also "country house" does seem to make it seem odd. But it basically means historic house/estate... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:02, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Well you might be surprised to learn that you and others have recently categorised a huge number of "mine" which are just tiny stubs and far from "good." I live in hope that one day someone will be able to do more than just give these lesser country houses a quick architectural description and quote Pevsener just to give a semblence of a ref and respectability to the page. On your second point, any house which could conceivably been regarded as a country house (today in Greater London) when built is elligible, I'm not so sure about those though which were always intended to ba a villa suburbana. Giacomo Returned 18:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Well, I appreciate your honesty on that one, naturally I only saw the ones you'd written fully! But none of us have the time to write every article to the standard we want. But the way I see it there is only a finite number of country houses and eventually those stubs will be expanded. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah the London dilemna and the previous naming convention has persuaded me to rename it List of historic houses in the United Kingdom. I think this is probably a more suitable title.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Why isn't User:Giano/The_Private_Rooms_of_the_Winter_Palace in the main space.[edit]

It looks ready to go to me?-- (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Well it doesn't to me. But thanks for the comment anyway. Giacomo Returned 21:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I moved it into mainspace.--Adam in MO Talk 05:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Palazzo Foscari[edit]

I have made a request for move regarding Palazzo Foscari, I noticed your comment from 2010 regarding the naming of the article, and I thought you may be interested in the request. Monty845 17:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Indeed you have, and I have responded [5]. Giacomo Returned 20:30, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
I would also suggest checking out this section from this policy on article ownership. I moved the page back into the mainspace. Cheers. --Adam in MO Talk 08:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
The gods invented userspace as an incubation area in which crappy articles can become decent articles. And yes, I have checked (or checked out) that section from the page about ownership. I have moved the page back. If you, Adam in MO, would like to add an article to mainspace, go ahead and write your own article and add it to mainspace. When the author of this embryonic article thinks that it's worth presenting to the world, he'll move it, and then you may improve it. -- Hoary (talk) 11:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. I will help improve it, if I can where it is at, and hopefully it will be better for it when it does hit the mainspace.--Adam in MO Talk 13:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Aha! You now have both User:GiacomoReturned/The Private Rooms of the Winter Palace and User:Giano/The Private Rooms of the Winter Palace. This much I understand. But I'm now too sleepy to start to think how best to resolve this. I think the best thing is to decide at your leisure and only then to have one deleted. Good night! -- Hoary (talk) 13:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Giano, I understand your frustration at what happened, but calling me a troll and an idiot right out of the gate is not helpful. I have had no interactions with you in the past and I am not out to get anyone. I am just trying to make a better project here as I assume that you are doing as well. So please in the future lets try to work together and easy up on the personal attacks.--Adam in MO Talk 13:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I came to play civility police as well. (My truncheon was sadly lost in the userbox wars, now I have this wholly inadequate sausage.) I know not to get offended, but others not so much. Please be gentle. And (perhaps more importantly) if you have a tomato and some cheese, we have the start of something here. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 14:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

  • This experienced user knew exactly what he was doing - he was trolling. Who else, but a troll or a newbie, would go into userspace and remove a notice at the top of a page saying "This is an unfinished wikipedia article" [6]. Then look at the page and see it is littered with memos to me and unfinished sections - rooms referred to on a plan which have yet to be written up - and a whole section entitled "memos" which is full of didorganised clear aides de memoir and notes etc. I like to work in a chaotic mess and tat page is clearly a chaotic mess. It was obviously a draft and still is. Yet he put it into mainspace not once, but twice, both times having already seen a talk page discussion where I say the page is not yet ready for mainspace [7]. From a longterm experienced editor, that is clear trolling. So do not come here talking of civility. Giacomo Returned 14:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I really wanted to talk about sausage. I'm sure I've heard "never attribute to malice what is better explained by ignorance" or something like that? I'm neither a newb nor a troll, and I do things all the time that look inexplicably idiotic to onlookers. And, really User:Adamfinmo isn't new? He's got like a thousand edits. He doesn't appear to do much deep-content work. You have socks older than him. He has a box on his user page "This user enjoys cleaning up vandalism." You two are in totally different worlds. Your drafts are many times better than the articles he normally sees. He made a mistake. But for the love of all that's holey, just accept his apology and move on.
But, more the pity, I'm going to go to bed. I am sorry that your work was interrupted, as there can be no argument that your articles are an incredible asset. Thanks for continuing to do the work that is the reason for this place's existence.
Aaron Brenneman (talk) 15:16, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
  • You do not make the same mistake twice and then tell me that I do not own a clearly unfinished article in my user space, which even on my talk page I say is not ready for mainspace. My views were quite clear and this was clear trolling. I have not noticed an apology only threats of sanctions from him. Sleep well. Giacomo Returned 15:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I was not trolling. I was trying to help out. It appears that I was mistaken. The second time I was baiting but I never intended to troll. I will not edit in any of your namespaces and you will not hear from me on this matter anymore. I was wrong.--Adam in MO Talk 21:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Indeed you were. Baiting is a always a very risky sport if you fail to gauge the size of your prey. Giacomo Returned 21:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
How about some contrition on your end? I admitted my mistakes.--Adam in MO Talk 22:00, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I beg your pardon? Contrition? Go joke some place else. Giacomo Returned 22:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I will do so. Enjoy being a jackass with your crew. By the way,this is a better link for your thoughts page. Chears Jerk.--Adam in MO Talk 22:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps some context would be appropriate here, Adamfinmo. To my recollection, this is the fourth time that someone has taken a page in Giacomo's userspace and tossed into mainspace without consulting him. The first two times it was done by two different sockpuppeters, and was done deliberately to annoy and irritate Giacomo. The third time, it was done by an editor who....well, let's say he suddenly decided that, having never read or written a word about architecture, he was extremely well qualified to improve articles on the topic; this was after he had suddenly taken an interest in Giacomo's work for reasons that had nothing to do with his userspace. And come along and do it not once, but twice. Given that historically whenever someone has moved a page out of Giacomo's userspace, it has been for inappropriate reasons, there's grounds for him to wonder if it isn't happening again when another unknown editor suddenly shows up and, without even so much as a "how do you do?" does the same thing. Now, I'm not a big fan of the "troll" word, regardless of who's saying it and how good of reason they have to do so. But I'm also not a big fan of people poking around other people's userspace looking for "cool" articles, when we have roughly 3.5 million articles in mainspace crying out for attention. Just some food for thought. Risker (talk) 23:16, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Adam made a mistake the first time and admitted that he was baiting the second time. I consider it to be tantamount to theft to take an article from another editor's talk page without their permission, and to do it twice is inexcusable. I think that Adam needs to learn that lesson. Malleus Fatuorum 23:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

How about if someone move-protects Giano's drafts, and lifts the protection only when they are ready for the mainspace. This would prevent premature moves, whether well-intentioned, trollish, or otherwise. The quid pro quo, of course, would be that we'd expect Giano to keep writing for mainspace. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

How about you tell Adam that pinching stuff from another editor's userspace is unacceptable? Malleus Fatuorum 02:55, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I have move protected User:Giano/The Private Rooms of the Winter Palace for 3 weeks. Let me know when you need it unlocked. Do you want anything done with User:GiacomoReturned/The Private Rooms of the Winter Palace, now a redirect? And have you considered declaring your page out of bounds to Adamfinmo? WP:ANI would uphold that like a shot. Bishonen | talk 06:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC).

Thank you all. Writing a category always was so going to have its problems - the page will be finished just as soon as I can find a format that I'm happy with - plus some more reliable references. In the meantime, I shall jusy keep plodding on with it - it will never be the project's most interesting page, but it does need more cohesion, continuity and information before it can be even be considered to be approaching completion. Incidentally, Malleus, you are 100% correct - it's funny how we all have different views on gross incivility, bad manners and what is acceptable bahaviour. Giacomo Returned 09:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

He's a sandbox thief. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Good old Wikipedia, a wikiword for every abuse! Bishonen | talk 22:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC).
To be fair, the essay does not technically apply because it was a proper move, not a copy and paste maneuver. But the term fits, and we could consider extending the essay to discuss this more subtle variant as well. Hans Adler 05:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Contradicting little 'shonen? That's enough of that! [Darwinbish bites Hans Adler shrewdly on the ass. ] And don't be fair! darwinbish BITE 08:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC).
wow. I remember that essay author and the ani that got him wikishot. Uncontroversial Obscurity 09:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. There's little on Wikipedia these days that does not "quack" or "bark." Giacomo Returned 06:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
yup; epic project failure. The WMF values levels of wikt:participation, not levels of quality. 90% of the articles are crap. Much like the wikt:participants.. Uncontroversial Obscurity 06:47, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Similar academic theft has occurred at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Content moved from userpage to article space. Would one of the admins here delete Ranveer Chandra and protect it from recreation? Cunard (talk) 05:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Your talk page comment[edit]

Hiya ;-) Been out of town for a family wedding.

Regarding your question/comment. I have no memory of the discussion since it happened years ago. And can find no correspondence from anyone but I assume that either you or Cary Bass would have told me. I talked to both of you pretty regularly back then in gmail chat. Take care, FloNight♥♥♥♥ 21:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hiya too! not to worry, they are all pretty discredited now and all their blocks with them. However, I do need an arb to contact me on another matter though - Amazing isn't it, when one requires one, they are all AWOL; make an incivil comment and one has them like exhaust blowing, red double-decker buses in a traffic jam in Piccadilly, but there is a rather worrying former editor on the loose - shall I deal it myself? Giacomo Returned 21:19, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
There are a few of us around - take your pick. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

edit to User:GiacomoReturned/Enquiry_into_the_Rlevse_Affair[edit]

Giacomo - I edited your page User:GiacomoReturned/Enquiry_into_the_Rlevse_Affair just to add a year value (2010) to the timestamps of the diffs you had collected, as it was hard to put into context otherwise. If that edit bothers you for any reason feel free to revert. Regards Manning (talk) 02:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Not at all Manning. These says my user space and archives seem to be more edited by others then the project itself. I'd actually forgotten to put that on my watchlist, so it will be interesting to take a renewed look at it. Giacomo Returned 06:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Interesting it was indeed. It's as mind blowingly horible now as it was then. What a cover up that was, and we don't need someone on WR to publish the Arbcom files to prove it, limted powers of deduction will suffice. Giacomo Returned 21:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Giacomo Returned 21:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Neuschwanstein Castle[edit]

Have you visited it? Kittybrewster 01:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, as a child, and Herenchiemsee and Linderhof. I've a few books on Ludwig's schlösser and Bayerische Barock, but they are all in German, and my German is more than a little rusty. Why, are you going on a yodelling holiday? Giacomo Returned 20:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
No; I can't yodel. I noticed your comment on the talk page. Kittybrewster 10:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Exploding houses[edit]

Aha, there you are! So, in the 1944 Town and Country Planning Act section, is it "Balbardie" or "Balbarbie" House? See file name. I realise that's another thing everybody in the world knows except me! Oh, and the grading of the listed buildings, in the same section: I suppose it's Grade I, II, and III? And not Grade II for both "buildings of special interest" and "buildings of more than special interest"? Please look at it, you'll see what I mean. Bishonen | talk 21:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC).

While we wait for His Excellency to provide a definitive answer, I can share a little of what I have gleaned. It was Grade I, II, and III in England and Wales, but Grade III was abolished in 1970 (and was non-statutory anyway), and Grade II was split into Grade II* and Grade II, giving the current system of "special interest (II)", "more than special interest (II*)", and "exceptional interest (I)". Of course non-secular buildings used a different scheme as did all buildings in Northern Ireland and Scotland. You could wade through the article Listed building for more excruciating detail. As for "Balbardie" vs "Balbarbie", there are several Balbardies in West Lothian (Primary School, Archery Club, Hotel, Golf Club, etc.) but no Balbarbie except for the Wikipedia picture (which I would be tempted to rename but I don't have the filemover permission). The article Balbardie House needs similar copyedits. --RexxS (talk) 17:28, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Ouch! I totally vandalised the grading, then! Thanks very much, Rex. I've moved the file and re-pointed the articles to it. Why aren't you an admin, again? Deplorable laziness, like Giacomo? Bishonen | talk 22:30, 3 August 2011 (UTC).
... And I've copyedited the article Balbardie House to rectify the typos there. I'll look over the exploding houses soon. Adminship? - I'm a content editor (yes, I know 1 FA, 1 FL, and 2 GAs isn't much in this august company, but I try). I couldn't even convince myself I need the tools, so I'd have no chance of convincing the peanut gallery at RfA! --RexxS (talk) 00:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I see. (Laziness it is.) Rex, if you do look over the exploding, could you have a go at formatting the notes and references, consistently italicising book titles and such? I've left that to last, because there are some of those nasty templates that get up my nose. (Do they have a purpose, beyond that of preventing newbs and me from adding references?) Bishonen | talk 12:53, 4 August 2011 (UTC).
  • I'm so sorry, but darlingest Giacomo can't help you as he is sunning himself elsewhere; I am briefly in a near deserted London "en passant" to see my dearest friend Jo Hansford, I can't survive two weeks without her. Funnily enough, seated there between darling Camilla (also en passant) and Jimbo (seemingly resident) this afternoon we were discussing dearest Wikipedia, Camilla thinks that I should re-write her Wikipedia biography on account of my very impartial views on the royal family and Jimbo (or should I say Sir James? - as we only half-teesingly called him) was in complete agreement. I must say, I am surprised to see you all beavering away here in August - do none of you have summer homes to go to? What a sad world it is. Never mind, September and the fall will soon be upon us and a normal service can be resumed - Giacomo will return to you fully invigorated and restored to full energy - Oh happy days. Much love to you all Lady Catherine Rollbacker-de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 22:41, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
No worries, dear Lady Catherine, Giacomo can safely continue to fry in the sun. Rex has cleared up the needless alarms I detailed above, and they can be freely ignored, while I go on to develop the class-war aspects of the article. Bishonen | talk 00:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC).
Well, templates are supposed to help folks format refs in a consistent way, and admins are supposed to have some sort of need for the tools – but that's all too difficult for my old dino-brain to get to grips with. Anyway, I've done a little cleaning at Destruction of country houses in 20th-century Britain: a couple of typos, a few duplicate refs, and I've tried to make titles italic by using the appropriate templates where needed. You might want to cast your eye over it to spot my mistakes; and have a think about whether the listed building grade scheme belongs best in the section on the 1944 Town and Country Planning Act or in the section on the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act. My own preference would be for the latter, as I believe that was when the details were expounded. I'll have another look tomorrow anyway. --RexxS (talk) 17:07, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Mmm, yes. Agreed. You're right, it's just a little hard to detach from its moorings in the 1944 section. I'll maybe try in a day or two.. unless it then turns out you've already done it? Oh, please do, and I'll help you escape from Bishzilla's pocket! Bishonen | talk 19:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC).


Say Giano, are you familiar with architecture of Shanghai at all? I know it is several thousand km east of what you're normally editing but I was trying to reactivate the China collaboration and discovered the architecture section was unsourced. I thought I could go fumbling round google books or online somewhere or other, but figured I'd ask someone who might have some idea first...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:29, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I don't think dearest Giacomo knows a great deal deal about architecture of Shanghai my dear. I wish I could help you, but my studies of Shaghai's architecture was confined to ceilings - and "cheers" to you too. Lady Catherine Rollbacker-de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 22:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
  • sigh....ah well, I must go there one day....Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Weird email[edit]

Like most of you I have had an odd email concerning "You are eligible to vote in the image filter referendum." While I am sure that is joyous news indeed, can someone tell me how I should be voting and if it concerns me? I can't imagine why I should want to hide an image from my gaze, after a couple of very dry martinis even the Wiki Chicks have a certain allure; so what is this all about? Simple languagae please and not links to dull debates. Giacomo Returned 18:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

The filter is designed to hide images that are sexual, violent, gory, etc. from the eyes of children and ultra conservative followers of a religion. It sounds good on paper but I am not sure if it will play out well it it is implemented. --Guerillero | My Talk 18:43, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

And to hide nasty pictures from us wikichicks. Poor Giacomo, I see the mental abilities have caught up with him. Well, I just explained how to vote (if desired) in words of one syllable to my mother, so I can't get more bored than I already am. Here you go:

  1. Make sure you're logged in on enwiki. As.. whoever, but you can only vote once.
  2. Type (or, better, copypaste) Special:SecurePoll/vote/230 in the search field. Press Enter.
  3. This will take you to a page with a large button with the legend "Go to the voting server". Click it.
  4. You are now on the voting page. You may need to scroll down some to see the voting table. Use the radio buttons to vote.
  5. Then scroll to the foot of the page and click "Submit vote".

And there we are. I hope that didn't give you a headache, dear. Bishonen | talk 20:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC).

  • Thank you, but it did give me a headache; it all sounds far too stresful and complicated - besides which I quite like to see the odd bottom or boob to liven the up the end of a busy day, so long as they are attached to something attractive and "chick-like". I think my religion probably invented dodgy artform anyway; so I am absolved from looking at these things. Giacomo Returned 08:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Siciliainahat.gif[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Siciliainahat.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T/C) 23:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Am I surrounded by idiots? it is perfectly obvious that it's an edited version of this File:Goat.jpg. Can some intelligent sould sort it for me, i am rather pre-occupied at the moment. Giacomo Returned 10:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Are you surrounded by idiots? That would depend where you are posting from; if you are using a terminal at a museum or library then the chances are "no", and if you are posting from one of those wi-fi enabled fast food concessions then undoubtedly "yes". If you are posting from the bosom of your family, I shall have to admit to ignorance in the matter. I trust this helps... LessHeard vanU (talk) 10:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
The answers to your questions, Excellency, are "yes" and "no". You are indeed surrounded by idiots. The problem was already sorted out by one of your surrounding idiots, as I couldn't find an intelligent soul at that time of night. --RexxS (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Events from 2 years ago[edit]

Hey Giano, you probably remember the events of two years ago. It is rearing its ugly head again, if you wouldn't mind taking a look for me and give me some advice. I can give you a few links to peruse, but they are basically in my recent contribus (mainly at WP:AE and on User_talk:EdJohnston. --Russavia Let's dialogue 14:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I will take a look, but at the moment I'm only editing Wikipedia for a few moments each day to maintain pages and files; it seems a lot of my "keep local" homedrawn plans are being deleted at the moment which are a priority as Commons cannot be trusted in my experience. I cannot beleive the Arbcom will allow the Eastern European Mailing List to rear its ugly head again; actually, I could beleive it, but will just hope I am wrong, even though I seldom am. Giacomo Returned 19:58, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
If you let me know which Keeplocal files you need to keep an eye on, I can put them on my watchlist. Mine are regularly under threat too, so a few more to watch wouldn't be a problem. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 21:12, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if it's any help, but I created a template Template:Now Commons Also Local to replace the one that instructs admins to delete local copies. It hasn't been deleted yet, so folks may want to make use of it. --RexxS (talk) 00:32, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks Slim, too many to mention and coupled with my present state of mind regarding Wikipedia [8]; I'm really not that bothered - a while away puts things into persective and the idiots and fools seem to outweigh the intelligent people here these days. I don't think I can be bothered to write for this daft project any more. Giacomo Returned 21:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I feel the same way, and I'm getting the sense that lots of editors are feeling it now, more than before. I was close to posting an outburst about illiteracy last night, but managed to take my hands off the keyboard just in time. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 21:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
True, I have had a month or so away and have returned to still find myself sick to death of the place. Writing here is a waste of time - I really beleive that; everyone seems to have an agenda, and it does not seem to be the well being of the project - accepted historoical fact has to be constantly fought over because some badly educated cretin from Idaho or the wrong end of Siberia does not feel it supports their personal politics; that's before we get to all the the other nutters bearing their huge chips. Too much is going on in the real world to be bothered with all this. Giacomo Returned 21:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I agree with SV. I too sense that an increasing number of editors, including myself, are beginning to wonder if there's any point to this endeavour. Malleus Fatuorum 22:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I sympathise with you, and sometimes wonder if it's just the addiction that keeps many of us here. On the other hand, respected content authors such as yourselves really do have a lot to offer, and Wikipedia still has the potential to be so much more. All we need to do is find a way to keep the loonies from distracting you while you create great content. --RexxS (talk) 00:32, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
For myself, I think it's now probably reached the tipping point. I've withdrawn from GA for instance, something I could never have seen myself doing even a few months ago, triggered by a comment by the self-appointed director of GA that my disengagement would result in happier nominators. I still hang around elsewhere to help worthy causes and worthy editors, and to bitch about the endemic stupidity here, but not much else. Malleus Fatuorum 00:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
That's why you left GAN, cuz a drive-by commentor rubbed you the wrong way? Stupidest thing I ever heard. Certainly you have a thicker skin then that, come on. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:33, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Not a "drive-by commentator", but the new lord of GA. I have better things to do with my time. Malleus Fatuorum 05:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear you've withdrawn from GA, Malleus. You're involvement in it was something that made me start to take it more seriously. I know what you mean about a tipping point. I'm nearly there, for several reasons, including that I feel I see more literacy problems that we had before—or maybe just fewer people caring. So I'm not involving myself in sorting out issues I might have tried to sort out before, that kind of thing. Semi-disengagement. A lot of editors seem to be in that boat. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 17:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
"Semi-disengagement" sums it up nicely for me too. Malleus Fatuorum 18:02, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
It's the kind of problem that doesn't show up in the statistics. The Foundation is keen on watching the figures—number of editors leaving versus number arriving. So long as there's a balance they don't care. There isn't a balance (editors are leaving and not being replaced), but over and above that there's the semi-disengagement issue: editors taking pages off their watchlists, seeing problems develop and deciding not to intervene as they might have before. That doesn't show up in the stats, but it's a serious issue.
Certain people associated with the Foundation have been saying for years that it doesn't matter who makes the edits; we are all just masks at the masked ball, and what matters is numbers alone. I suspect they'll start to see the folly of that position, though it may take a few years. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 18:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I've realised for some considerable time that the powers that be consider editors to be easily replaceable units of work, each of whose contributions are equally valuable, although I've never come to terms with that idea; it seems self-evidently insane to me. But as you say, time will tell who's barking mad. Malleus Fatuorum 23:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
There's actually a science behind that, so-called "crowd-sourcing". The theory goes that large numbers of small edits will, over time, make an article 'drift' towards quality and accuracy, even if each individual edit only improves the article imperceptibly, and I don't doubt that the Foundation believes in it implicitly. Where it falls down, of course, is that as the number of articles increases, the number of edits per article goes down, and the SPAs can alter articles in their bailiwick to reflect their own agenda. And now, as Douglas Adams wrote, that becomes "Somebody Else's Problem", as folks prefer not to have the hassle of confronting the POV-pushers, particularly the civil ones. --RexxS (talk) 23:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
The "replaceable units of work" idea has been expressed explicitly by senior people. A decision was made by the Foundation not long ago to try to attract lots of small donors, rather than a small number of people who give a lot of money, because the latter makes you vulnerable, in that if they pull out, or start trying to dictate terms, you're screwed. The same policy is pursued, for the same reason, regarding editors. We need more, we need fresh blood, we don't like vested contributors, and so on. Stats are often produced showing how much of the editing is done by anons, as if to emphasize that experienced editors aren't needed, but of course the stats tell us nothing about quality.
Personally, I think when the history of Wikipedia is written, we're going to be astonished by the small number of people who created and maintained it. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 23:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Absolutely right. In the context of Wikipedia crowd-sourcing is largely irrelevant, as most articles are edited by very few editors, often only two or three, which is hardly a crowd, and almost all of the content often comes from only one or two editors. Take this article for instance; when's the crowd going to turn up? And what will they add when and if they do, other than nitpicking over what is and isn't a mine in the US, for instance, and how we have to pander to the ignorance of American high-school students by not using the term at all. Malleus Fatuorum 23:34, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I saw a fairly prominent Wikipedian argue once that he felt sorry for people who tucked themselves away in a corner to write an article alone, because it missed the point about collaboration. So there you have crowd-sourcing as a good-in-itself. Not good because it might lead to quality (ignoring that it almost never does), but a thing to be aimed for regardless of consequence. I've also seen prominent Wikipedians regard it as a mark of a supposedly good editor that they had a large number of unique articles under their belt, compared to the number of edits, i.e. a very low "average edits per page." Focusing on articles to get them in shape was frowned on, because it meant you weren't collaborating enough.
Truth is, I've never seen a good crowd-sourced article. I've seen excellent articles created by a small number of like-minded editors working together, but it's rare to see that working out with more than two. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 23:50, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I can think of only a couple of articles I've collaborated on with more than one other editor, but they were editors I respected and trusted, not random oiks from the mythical crowd. The experience really was a good one, a highlight of my time at Wikipedia, but it's very far from what usually happens here. Anyone who believes in the wisdom of the crowd ought to consider what three or four motivated and experienced editors working together can do in an amazingly short time frame. Malleus Fatuorum 00:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

A huge part of the Wikipedia philosophy is that you mustn't get above yourself. We're supposed to de-individuate, collaborate, not OWN, not see ourselves as authors, not see the articles we produce as a work product. I remember when we discovered that a company was offering WP articles as print-on-demand books for extortionate prices, and the company had placed a byline on the front cover (three names of people who did not exist, while acknowledging WP in smaller print), a WP spokesman responded to a press query about it saying it was great—"we" welcomed it, because it meant "our" work was being spread. I remember thinking, "I am volunteering for an organization that welcomes the theft of my work, and the placing on it of someone else's name, and has done so without consulting me, or any of the other authors whose work has been nicked." This is why some people see it as a cult, because that's a completely stupid state of affairs. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 00:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree completely. I've been waiting for the rational alternative to the Wikipedia cult philosophy to emerge for some time now, and when it inevitably does you won't see me for dust. Malleus Fatuorum 00:16, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Can someone do something to stop some brain bye-passed idiot deleting these images, which if I ever must entheusiasm for this project aagain I shall probably want, which is why most of them link to userspace page. Thank you Giacomo Returned 12:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

  • b File:Blenheimstate.jpg‎; 10:06 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:Blenheimprivate.jpg‎; 10:06 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:Blenheimenfilade.jpg‎; 10:05 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:Blenheimpianonobile.jpg‎; 10:05 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:Blenheimoverhead1.jpg‎; 10:05 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:BlenheimLibrary.jpg‎; 10:05 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:Blenheimanotherview.jpg‎; 10:04 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . bFile:BlenheimChapTomb.jpg‎; 10:04 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b FFile:Blenheimair.jpg‎; 10:04 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
  • (diff | hist) . . b File:Blenincomplte4.jpg‎; 10:02 . . (+18) . . Fbot (talk | contribs) (BOT: Flagging orphaned free file) [rollback]
Sadly, Excellency, brain-by-passed idiots are almost impossible to stop, but Nikkimaria has cleaned up the bot guano, and your humble servant has added a prophylactic template {{File for article in progress}} that may serve to ward off evil, unless the template itself gets deleted. --RexxS (talk) 17:47, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Mentmore Towers / Jacobethan / Renaissance Revival[edit]

Before reinstating your claims about Mentmore being based on a design by Serlio, please find a reliable source to back it up. The Renaissance Revival article is a bit of a mess because the term is so all-encompassing (in some poor interpretations) as to be almost meaningless (though as the majority of the examples on that article's page show, it is generally accepted as being a revival of specifically Italian palazzo type models, rather than applying to the revival of any style that was in use anywhere in Europe during any part of the Renaissance). Jacobethan is more specific, is supported by the government's own list description for Mentmore (as shown in the source I have cited), and is more correct in the context of Mentmore than the vague "Renaissance Revival". Ghughesarch (talk) 20:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I am very much afraid that you have swallowed the old chestnut of Mentmore being based on Wollaton. While I am quite sure that Baron Mayer and Paxton initially saw Wollaton as the inspiration, if you take the time to study the Serlio plans on which Wollaton was relaiably based, you will see that Mentmore is entirely more faithful to the plan of Serlio than Wollaton ever was. All the oggee domed turrets of Wollaton are dispensed with and the interior is entirely given over to the Renaissance - most notably the very Renaissance arcaded central courtyard - glazed to become a Victorian lounge hall - it even has the essential massive Renaissance staircase rising from the arcades. I think if we couple that to encompass that Mentomre was designed to display a famed Renaissance collection of art, we can dispense with "Jaco-whatever." Giacomo Returned 21:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Oh and PS regarding your references; I am really not that bothered by the opinions of ill-educated office workers or whoever it is who categorises these things without bothering to research! Oh yes, and if the British Governement understood these matters, today, Mentmore would be one of its finest museums of Renaissance art, not an empty festering ruin. Giacomo Returned 21:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Unless you can provide a reliable source which states that Menmore is Renaissance Revival, it remains Jacobethan. In fact, it remains Jacobethan anyway. You don't I note, engage with the point I made above about the term Renaissance Revival and its relative useful (or useless) ness in this context.

The "Old Chestnut" about the house being based on Mentmore is supported by, among others, Dr Mark Girouard, the foremost authority on the subjects of both the Elizabethan country house and the Victorian country house. See his "Victorian Country Houses", 1978, which states this explicitly. Plus a glance at a photograph of Wollaton will show that Menmore's architectural style is very nearly a direct copy. Both have interesting Renaissance centralised plans (Girouard also has an excellent essay in his "Town and Country" discussing the various sources for Wollaton), but a architectural style is not just a matter of the shape of the building's footprint, or its interior decoration. The "ill-educated office workers" who wrote that description of Mentmore were anything but - actually well-respected architectural historians who knew what they were doing, and indeed were also often the same people who were utterly dismayed by the politcal decisions which led to the sale and dispersal of the contents in 1976. How patronising of you to assume differently Ghughesarch (talk) 21:24, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh you are quite wrong. No one doubts or disputes the similarity between Wollaton and Mentmore, however, unlike Wollaton, Mentmore adheres to Serlios's plan more closely - it does not display the quitinsential details of your Jaco-thingy. Infact Mentmore's appearance is far less jolting and restful to the eye than Wollaton - that in itself should be telling you something - try to think what. The banding, parapets and indeed the entire external decoration is entirely that of the Renaissance as is the internal design. The big mistake at Mentmore was using the mullioned windows uniformly externally and making them smaller inside - the blackened glass intended to disguise this gave the house a look of dereliction long before the British government passed their death sentence on a heritage of which it has no comprehension. Giacomo Returned 21:36, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
No, you are the one who's quite wrong. I see no advantage in continuing to discuss this with someone who clearly doesn't know what they are talking about, is unable to use their eyes, and who will not adhere to basic WP rules regarding claims requiring sources, and even flirts off the edge of basic civility - your "do your homework" was quite an arrogant comment to make and matters have not improved since then. Ghughesarch (talk) 21:39, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Well when you have gone off and done your homework, on the English Renaissance and its Neo-Nenaissance and the hybrids which come in between, then I prepared to discuss the with you. Giacomo Returned 21:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Mentmore Towers[edit]

Hi Ghughesarch and GiacomoReturned, Can I suggest you both take your spat to the talk page rather than slug it out in the edit summary. You are both guilty of edit warring and have also gone too far as regards WP:3RR, (Posted on both you Talk Pages)Cheers Tmol42 (talk) 21:03, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

How nice of you to take an interest in these matters and cheer to you too Giacomo Returned 21:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Wollaton Hall[edit]

Does Reiff's book on the influence of pattern books on American architecture 1738-1750 actually make the specific claim that Wollaton Hall (an English house built 150 years before the period he's writing about) is based on a plan by Serlio? and if so, which of Serlio's designs is it? Clearly it's quite important - to put it mildly - that this should be the case. And how reliable is Reiff when writing outside his particular field? Ghughesarch (talk) 22:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

For now, that's for me to know and you to look up; let that be you homework asignement for the evening. Loved you latest edit, I can honestly say the the similarity between Solomon's Temple and Mentmore has never struck me - is the temple Jaco-thing too? Giacomo Returned 22:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Your homework for tonight is to read the work of a well-respected architectural historian and find out. It's a very interesting piece, quite convincing in explaining why Wollaton has a fairly-inaccessible "prospect room" far bigger, and sited differently, than any other comparable house - the one element that Paxton omitted when adapting it for Mentmore, which is perhaps why Mentmore and Solomon's Temple have little in common, and why I added that reference to the article on Wollaton. Do try keeping up with your reading.
As for Reiff, I see the source states that "Robert Smythson, who designed Wollaton Hall, Nottinghamshire (1580-88), drew, it seems, on Serlio, Book III, for the plan of the house, as well as for the design of a chimneypiece, traceable to Serlio's Books III and VII". "It seems" is hardly a ringing endorsement for the claim as expressed in the article. Ghughesarch (talk) 22:29, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Sorry Ghughesarch, but David Yeomans (1997). The Serlio floor and its derivations. Architectural Research Quarterly, 2, doi:10.1017/S1359135500001445 seems to agree with me too! "The floor at Wollaton is a variety of the type of structure described by Serlio and introduced into. England through his First Book of Architecture following." Giacomo Returned 22:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
No, that's about the construction of floors, not about Serlio's house plans. Abstract: The idea of spanning a space with beams, none of which is long enough to reach clear across, is one which has long held a fascination for designers. Described by Villard de Honnecourt and by Serlio, variations on this form have appeared both in drawings and in actual use. This paper describes examples of both and considers the structural behaviour of this kind of arrangement. Ghughesarch (talk) 22:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
However, I'm not sure that I completely agree with the many eminent experts that Wollaton's plan was taken from Serlio's Poggio Reale; I can think of one or two others that I could put up quite a convinicing arguement for Can't you? Giacomo Returned 22:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Poggio Reale has a similar outline but the plan is utterly different in almost every other respect - cloistered central courtyard being the most obvious. The footprint is simply a square with towers at the corners (in Serlio far more accommodation is contained in these towers than at Wollaton). Beyond that slight resemblance however, any square building with projecting corner towers could be claimed as deriving from that plan. I could equally claim that Serlio derived his plan from the keep of most English Norman castles on those grounds. Ghughesarch (talk) 22:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
It is indeed, except of course Mentmore (of which are are realy talking) has the cloistered courtyard, cleverly adapted to a hall, to think so many clever, respected and published people (such as Banister Fletcher) disagree with us and claim Wollaton is based on Poggio Reale. No, I favour the plan of Serlio's Château d'Ancy-le-Franc - you see Mentmore really does favour the Serlio plan far more than Wollaton and neither does it have that Gothicy/towery horrible hall thing dominating it. Paxton was building in a prety faithful Renaissance style eliminating the English Jacobean influences - the pediments on the towers and decoration are pure Serlio. Giacomo Returned 23:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
I fear we may have been arguing at cross-purposes. Although I don't agree with your disapproval of Jacobethan as describing the architectural style of Mentmore, Jacobethan very usefully describes the English revivalist architecture of the mid nineteenth century which derived from English Elizabethan and Jacobean prototypes, particularly those which are considered to represent the work of the early English Renaissance. This is characterised by elements which relate to the architecture of the Low Countries at the same time – mullioned windows (a technologically-limited survival of the mediaeval), shaped gables and strapwork in external elevations. All of these are present at both Wollaton and Mentmore, which justifies the description of the latter as Jacobethan.
I've typed a fair bit, higher up, about why Renaissance Revival as an art-historical term is either too wide-ranging to be meaningful (as the former inclusion of the definitely neo-Tudor Otago Boys' College in the article demonstrated), or else should be understood as the Victorians clearly understood it – to be reproductions of the (mainly, as far as the prototypes were concerned) Florentine palazzo and the particular elevational treatments derived therefrom.
If “Renaissance Revival” is to retain its distinct and useful identity, then terms like “Jacobethan” must be allowed, to describe those examples whose immediate visual impact is Jacobethan. Mentmore is certainly one of those – it does not look like an Italian Renaissance building, by any stretch of the imagination. The central hall is a feature of other houses of the same period, such as Barry's Highclere Castle, but that doesn't make them Serlian.
Whether something looks like a Serlio plan (and the shaped gables on the towers of Mentmore and Wollaton are Vredeman de Vries, not Serlio - the slight resemblance to Serlian church facades has been bastardised beyond any possibility of such a specific attribution) has little to do with this, as architectural style tends to be based on elevations rather than plans. The Palace of Westminster was rightly described by its co-architect, Pugin, as “All Classic – Tudor details on a Classic body”. But that does not make it a classical building as the term is usually understood. Banister Fletcher is useful for the illustrations, but out of date, to say the least, in the text. Ghughesarch (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid over Serlio's input, the experts unanimously do not agree with you. You fail to understand that the Renaissance was not confined purely to Italy and mullioned windows were not uniquly English. Contrary to the opinions of those who like to put things neatly into boxes Mentmore is not Jacobethan; it is neo-Renaissance because its motifs and genres are entirely European rather than from main land England (over which Elizabeth and James ruled) This fact is further accentuated by the family who built it whose many extraordinary houses favoured many diverse and hybrid European styles, regardless of wherever they happned to build their houses. Personally, I think Mentmore would have looked odd wherever it was plonked down. Howver, no matter which path he arrived so, Serlio is indisputebly the architect behind the house and he was very much of the Renaissance. Giacomo Returned 23:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Mentmore is Jacobethan, and precisely for the reasons you have just given - the term describes the revival of English (early) Renaissance architecture - which derived from a wide range of sources around Europe, not just a vague resemblance to a couple of plans by Serlio, who did not invent either the symmetrical courtyard plan, or the square plan with corner towers. I also note you still haven't clarified where you stand on whether Renaissance Revival should be an all-encompassing (and therefore useless) term, or whether it should be used to describe what the Victorians understood by it at the time these places were being built.Ghughesarch (talk) 23:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
PS: have you found a reliable source yet that describes Mentmore as Renaissance Revival? The Sotheby's sale catalogue from 1976 says it's Jacobethan, but I'll hold off from adding a third Ghughesarch (talk) 23:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
And you might try actually reading the Jacobethan article, before you dismiss the term and its relevance to Mentmore. There's perhaps a wikilink you could revise in the first line...(edit - I've done it for you)Ghughesarch (talk) 00:09, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't think I need to read it again; untill your recent input there, I was its 3rd main editor; Oh yes, and "the Sotheby's catalogue says "Paxton chose a "Jacobean" style" (page IX) no mention of Jacobethan! I have the full set of catalogues right here beside me, anything else that you would like to know? Furthermore, all the English houses which bear any passing resemblence to Mentmore, were completed before the accession of James I, so we can dispense with Jacobean once and for all. I am not in the habbit of repeating mistakes, no matter how eminent the man who first erred. Mentmore is a pretty faithful reproduction of the Renaissance as it developed in nothern Europee in the late 16th century. it is not Jacobethan or Jacobean - no matter who says so. Giacomo Returned 11:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

thumb|right|300px|is this great hall, Elizabethan or European Renaissance in style - 1st correct amswer wins a secret prize.

I didn't say Mentmore is Jacobean, I said it is Jacobethan. And until you find a reliable source, not your personal view, to show otherwise, Wikipedia will continue to say that it's Jacobethan, in line with the reliable sources that say it is.Ghughesarch (talk) 12:10, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Here's the plan of Wollaton: and here's the plan of Ancy: I'd say the resemblance between them isn't as close as you'd like to believe - there are some similarities in general form, but not in detail, and of course the treatment of the elevations is completely different. I can't immediately lay hands on a plan of Mount Edgcumbe (1547-53) before its post-War rebuilding, but I strongly suspect that Wollaton is derived more closely from that than from Ancy. Ghughesarch (talk) 12:19, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

You claimed that the Mentmore cataloges say that the house is Jacobethan [9] - it does not state that at all. All resepected architectural historians attribute the concept Wollaton's plan to Serlio. It is you who are trying to insert "your personal view" and I would strongly advise against saying what Wikipedia will and will not continue to do; I shall correct the article just as soon as I feel to do so will not be edit-warring. Giacomo Returned 13:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
If you can't provide a reliable source for the edit you are clearly intending to make, doing that will be contrary to WP guidance. I can, and have, provided reliable sources in the article that say it is Jacobethan, and that statement, and the sources that support it, will remain in the article. As you claim to have the Mentmore catalogue, perhaps you can check to see where it sayd that Mentmore is "Renaissance Revival", or where it, or any other source, explicitly states that it is not Jacobethan? Ghughesarch (talk) 19:07, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

"Claim" to have the Mentmore Catalogue? Oh you silly person. Have you even read it? I have all volumes. Now since you are the one erroniosly referencing from it - prove it Volume I, p131 what is described? Volume IV, p40 last entry (lot 2467)? Giacomo Returned 19:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm bored with your attitude. Find a reliable source that explicitly says that Menmore is NOT Jacobethan. Otherwise, live with it.Ghughesarch (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I thought those questions might bore you. In the meantime, before you hit your local library; in the catalogue, Frank Watson in his appraisal of the house describes the Grand Hall as an "Elizabethan Courtyard" I don't think in this day and age anyone is going to swallow that either - certainly not any of Wikipedia's better architectural editors - time knowledge and opinions have moved on - you need to move with them. It's pure renaissance Giacomo Returned 19:28, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm bored with your attitude. Find a reliable source that explicitly says that Menmore is NOT Jacobethan. Otherwise, live with it.Ghughesarch (talk) 19:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, at all, what style individual rooms in the interior happen to be. When will you get your head round the fact that you are arguing from a completely false first premise.Ghughesarch (talk) 19:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I thought you had become bored. Actually, it does matter because the whole house was built around that hall and in that style - to display a Renaissance collection. Now seeing as you are here Volume V, p88 (Lot 322) what is it? Giacomo Returned 19:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't know, and you won't be surprised to find that I don't care, unless it's a drawing by Joseph Paxton titled in his own hand "Design for Rotschild's definitely not Jacobethan House at Mentmore"Ghughesarch (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
So we can asume that you don't have the catalogue then. God, talking to you is as much fun and as laborious as doing one's own root canal work 19:51, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I never claimed I had the catalogue. Though a search did find a Sotheby's catalogue relating to Mentmore online, with a sentence describing Mentmore as Jacobethan. My apologies if this is not the 1976 catalogue as I had assumed, but a later sale of items that had previously been at Mentmore, we all make mistakes - as you did about David Yeomans supporting the idea that Wollaton is a Serlio design. Henry Pordes rare books is currently selling a set of the catalogues with this description, however - London: Sotheby Parke Bernet, 1977. Five volume catalogue for the May 1977 sale of the contents of Mentmore, the Jacobethan stately home built by Joseph Paxton for Baron Mayer de Rothschild.
I assume you haven't read Girouard, or else consider your own views superior to his? Ghughesarch (talk) 19:58, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Here's the link to the Sotheby's catalogue - I can't get the wretched thing to download now: It does, however, incliude the sentence "He chose the `Jacobethan style' taking as his model Wollaton Hall outside Nottingham." Ghughesarch (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't really read online books, not a lot of point when one has the hard copy. However, regarding your above point: I have read Girouard extensively - sometimes I agree sometimes I don't. I have this amazing thing called a mind which allows me to work things out for myself, and I'm afraid that in this instance a house modelled on a house (completed during the life of Elizabeth I) designed by Serlio, recreated entirely using Renaissance motifs, and deliberatly disregarding the late Elizabethan motifs of its prototype cannot be stereotyped as "Jacobethan." It can only be Neo-Renasissance. To be Jacobethan a house has to at least vaguely resemble Hatfield or one of those gabled turretty Suffolk houses (whose names currently escape me) - Sandringham is Jacobethan - its a bit of fun; Mentmore seriously adheres too much to the original, so has to be neo-renaissance. Giacomo Returned 20:09, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Not a lot of point me restating the obvious, yet again, but for the purposes of wikipedia and not for the purposes of a fascinating discussion, the onus remains on you to provide a reliable source which explicitly contradicts the reliable sources which describe Mentmore as Jacobethan.
Anything else is, for the purposes of the wikipedia article on Mentmore, entirely a side issue. However, the plan and (far more so) the elevations closely follow Wollaton. Ghughesarch (talk) 20:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Oh, but I have one, didn't I tell you? Thanks anyway for the debate; as I said, I shall make the necessary corrections in due course. Good night. Giacomo Returned 20:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Go on then - a reliable source which explicitly states that Mentmore Towers is not Jacobethan? Looking forward to seeing it Ghughesarch (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I have no intention of warring with you on the page for some considerable time; you (and all the little admins with fingers currently on the block button) must learn some patience. I think three years is my record to make or complete a page so far - people have been known to die in less time. Just watch the space.Giacomo Returned 20:31, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Nothing stopping you, in the proper spirit of scholarly collaboration, sharing your source here. If it exists, what's the problem? Ghughesarch (talk) 20:35, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Featured article review for Francis Petre[edit]

I have nominated Francis Petre for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. You are receiving this notice because you were identified as one of three editors with the most edits to the article. Brad (talk) 08:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Save Mentmore[edit]

Hey G, in relation to File:SAVEMentmore.jpg so you have any information on when the photograph on the cover of this booklet may have been taken. If the photograph by itself is in the public domain, the entire image is in the public domain due to it being a reproduction. This would then make it a candidate for copying over to Commons, whilst keeping a local copy if you do desire. If you have any info on the actual photograph, drop me a line. Cheers, --Russavia Let's dialogue 11:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

  • I would immagine that the picture is 'not in the public domain. It was taken expressly for the book cover and uploaded for use on relevant pages. Giacomo Returned 12:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
    • OK, if you ever find any evidence that it is an older photo (it does kinda look like it), and could be in PD, let me know. Cheers, --Russavia Let's dialogue 12:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
  • It's extremely unlikely that I will be doing any further research on Mentmore Towers. I own probably the largest library covering the house in Europe, so I know all that I need to know; Wikipedia is doomed to remain in ignorance on the subject which is a pity, but sadly what happens when sword wielding skeletons become involved. Giacomo Returned 13:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Giano, as you know I am under restrictions from interacting with ANY members of EEML, whilst only EEML members who were sanctioned are banned from interacting with me. I now have my own case of a battleground WP:RANDY - Talk:Aeroflot#Undue_and_POV.2FBLP_information_removed_from_the_article - do you have any advice on what the hell I am supposed to do here, because it is an article which I have recently begun to rewrite (read the first 3 sections) and which I am talking to Aeroflot PR about getting materials released under free licences for use on Wikimedia, and it an article which is in the area of my professional expertise. After having his edits rejected Randy has again pushed for the return of those edits, and is clearly using the interaction restriction on me as a battleground weapon in order to essentially lock me out of an article which I am involved in, and which they are not. To put it mildly, it is fucking pathetic. Advice appreciated, because I'll be damned if I am simply going to walk away and let these Randy's do this to productive editors. Russavia Let's dialogue 06:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
I am not equiped to advise on this. As you know, I regard the whole EEML saga as Wikipedia's most disgraceful epeisode. The resulting astonishing decisions and sanctions by the Arbcom sailed the project's entire credibility and integrity down the river and over the falls. It was a cop out by the Arbcom about which certain Arbs should still be anging their heads in shame. We will never know the full depths to which the deceit and subterfuge permuted through Wikipedia, and I have no doubt doubt we are still living with unknown and undiscovered results of that deceit today. I have no wish to become involved with that lying crew in any way. Giacomo Returned 08:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Going back to the photo, it looks like a between the wars Country Life one, but who knows. Even if the photo was PD, the graphic design of the cover, such as it is, would also be protected by copyright. CL photos come out of copyright 50 yrs after the magazine used them btw. Johnbod (talk) 11:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Actually, it was taken in the early 1970s - expressly for the pamphlet. Normally the armchairs ("Venetian" throne chairs - probably intended for a Bishop or cardinal in a church rather than a king - I think they were in the Stowe sale of 1848) were grouped more sociably around the fireplace. A huge vernis Martin piano, a Neapolitan sedan chair an free standing quadruple faced Orrery clock all had to be moved from the centre of the room to enable the shot to be taken. The carpet was an Aubusson (I think) - it had a dodgy brown stain on it, which according to who was telling the story was either the blood of Marie Antoinette (unlikely) or the blood of the Emperor of Mexico (more likely, but still very unlikely). The tappestries "les Mois Lucas" were a complete set of 12 Gobelins and indicated the Zodian months. They were comissioned by Golbert circa 1683. The three lanterns (just vsible) were alledgedly from the Bucentaur - I think the to smaller may have been, but I strongly doubt the centre one was. The room was normally so cluttered once could barely move. Giacomo Returned 12:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Prior Park[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if I could pick your expert knowledge/brains? I've just put up an article on Prior Park and wondered if you had any sources which would help with the architecture section? We previously had an article on Prior Park Landscape Garden and one on Prior Park College but nothing specifically about the house. I've found a lot on the history but limited description of the architecture and wondered if you could help?— Rod talk 20:41, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I will check it out, I do have a Godson at school there and have heard an amazing story about the lead being stolen off the roof while no one noticed, which is not very encyclopedic or needed. I have just looked at my Pevsners; I have N Somerset, which does not have it - presumably it's in S Somerset. I'll have a look about tomorrow; I must have something on it somewhere. Giacomo Returned 21:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
<entire copyright paragraph snipped> – Fully described, insofar as anything in the early Pevsners can be called "fully described", in Nikolaus Pevsner, The Buildings of England: North Somerset and Bristol, (Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1958). Ghughesarch (talk) 21:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, Ghughesarch, but that violates many of our policies. The book is still in copyright, and since this is a user talk page one cannot even make the claim of fair use. I've left the reference. Risker (talk) 22:49, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, as Giacomo has the book, he can no doubt find it on a second look Ghughesarch (talk) 23:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Indeed it is - silly me was looking under "p" for Prior rather than "b" for Bath - there is quite a bit on pages 113-115. I'll add something tonight - unless soeone else would rather do it before then. Giacomo Returned 08:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for any help. It's just been pointed out to me, by another editor, that Pevsner's comments & some others are at this page.— Rod talk 16:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I think your version is better than mine - so I've restored it. The ionic columns bit was from IoE whereas this more recent page says "unfluted Corinthian columns, returned double at ends" so I'd go with your Corinthian. The best photo of the columns I can find its this one but still not very clear.— Rod talk 20:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
That's very flattering :-/ That picture does look like Corinthian; shame they don't cut the hedges a little more often. Just a matter of the porte cochere bit, which sounds to me like someone missing the point, unless there is a later porte cochere somewhere, but I would have thought the house was a little early for one of those, but it was mucked about with in the 19th cent - so who knows? Giacomo Returned 20:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Corinthian on the North (garden) front, Ionic (and attached) on the south (entrance) front, as shown here: I agree about the porte cochere - I can't see how the north portico could ever have been one. Ghughesarch (talk) 20:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Well, that's not really a portico is it? Just emphasisis given to the central bays by Ionic colums - or is that called a portico in English? Giacomo Returned 21:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I was talking about the North (Corinthian, garden front) portico. The south front (Ionic) centrepiece could quite reasonably be called an attached portico, however (as opposed to a prostyle portico). They're both porticos as far as the list description is concerned, for example, with no prostyle or attached distinction. Ghughesarch (talk) 21:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Possibly, but I would not call it a portico, it's neither recessed or prostyle, just a pillared centrepiece - not even a shelter from the rain - no, I think portico is far too extravagant a term for what is just an architectural empahisis to break up a very monotonous facade. Giacomo Returned 22:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Or an "engaged" portico, if you prefer (as in the description here: It may not be what the Italians originally meant by the term, but portico, in English architectural terminology, generally means a temple-front, whether it's just stuck on, or sticking out. A recessed portico would be a portico in antis, which is yet another sub-type. Ghughesarch (talk) 22:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
No, I still will not be calling that a portico, engaged or disengaged it is misleading. Giacomo Returned 22:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
well, you'll be in a minority among architectural historians, but if you can find a source, go ahead. (Actually, the lack of a pediment at Wootton makes that particular example borderline, in my view, but not in the view of Country Life). I don't see why it's "misleading" though. Ghughesarch (talk) 22:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
May I just say that, Jacobethan aside, I do enjoy this sort of civilised discussion far more than your characterisation of me as "Randy in Boise" might suggest. If I didn't know him better, I might think you were John Harris Ghughesarch (talk) 22:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you both for your contributions & the discussion (if a little out of my architectural league). I have added a short mention trying to explain Corinthian columns on the northern (garden) side - leaving the title "prostyle portico" - and adding the six ionic columns on the southern façade.— Rod talk 11:05, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Looking at some other sources for Prior Park. this one has kindly been pointed out to me which specifically talks about a "former porte-cochere, part of Wood's original layout" in the east wing.— Rod talk 14:19, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Yep, that is quite possible, a porte cochere to a pavilion - as a secondary or family wing it would not have to followed the Palladian ideals quite so closely - even so, 1750 is a few years early for one, but the refs seem quite sure - I always think of them as neo-classical or 19th century features - but they are a logical thing, so thet probably existed for years before they became the Victorian/Jacobethan must have. Come to think of it, I think Holland built a huge porte cochere (now demolished) at Woburn Abbey, that must have been sometime around then - I must check the date out - It certainly had one, I wonder if it was original or stuck on later? As for you Mr Ghughesarch,a couple of pilasters cemented to a wall, with a gable above does not a portico make, otherwise every "mock Georgian" doorcase would be a portico. With your love of dodgy grandiose terms, you should become an real estate agent - every garage could become a "coach house", suitable for conversion to Dowager accomadation. Giacomo Returned 17:56, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Dowagers are not exactly an abundant commodity, so maybe a re-titling? LessHeard vanU (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
This discussion reminds me of a story by Stephen Leacock written in 1911. He was one of Groucho Marx's favorite authors. This excerpt is from "Gertrude the Governess"

Nosham Taws was a typical English home. The main part of the house was an Elizabethan structure of warm red brick, while the elder portion, of which the Earl was inordinately proud, still showed the outlines of a Norman Keep, to which had been added a Lancastrian Jail and a Plantagenet Orphan Assylum. From the house in all directions stretched magnificent woodland and park with oaks and elms of immemorial antiquity, while nearer the house stood raspberry bushes and geranium plants which had been set out by the Crusaders. Life at the Taws moved in the ordinary routine of a great English household. At 7 a gong sounded for rising, at 8 a horn blew for breakfast, at 8:30 a whistle sounded for prayers, at 1 a flag was run up at half-mast for lunch, at 4 a gun was fired for afternoon tea, at 9 a bell sounded for dressing, at 9:15 a second bell for going on dressing, while at 9:30 a rocket was sent up to indicate that dinner was ready. At midnight dinner was over, and at 1 a.m. the tolling of a bell summoned the domestics to evening prayers.

Uncle uncle uncle 21:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like the remararkably ordered life at one of England's other geat houses. Giacomo Returned 10:48, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the page - I did see the resemblance. The Leacock novel looks to have come into the public domain: [10]. Frank Muir [11] in "The Oxford Book of Humorous Prose" page 437 claims that the "Gertrude The Governess" story contains one of the two best-known lines in humorous prose.

The Catherine de Burgh User:Catherine de Burgh/Catherine Bonkbuster page reminded me of "Lady Addle Remembers" but when I reread my Lady Addle I saw that except for the theme, timeline, photos, and much else that the two women are quite different, although that is to be expected as "Lady Addle Remembers" is a work of fiction. You can see the difference in this paragraph from "Lady Addle Remembers" pages 10-12:

This delicate fastidiousness she inherited from my grandmother, the Duchess of Droitwich who always wore white kid gloves in the house because of a rooted aversion from touching anything that had been fingered by the servants. She only removed them when she wanted to touch her husband or children. One morning, however, she absent-mindedly walked into his dressing-room while he was getting up and found that he was being dressed by the butler, and thereafter she wore gloves even when alone with the Duke. My father was a bit of a martinet and insisted on our being educated. We had, besides our English governess, a French Mademoiselle for French, a German Fraulein for German, an Italian Signora for Italian, a Spanish Senorita for Spanish, and a Russian lady who took the dogs out.

Uncle uncle uncle 16:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I really think that my beloved cousin, Lady Addle, will be of little interest to Wikipedia's editors - not a crowd noted for their understanding of the finer points of life. When darling Blanche left us, panache left the world with her. As for you - one thing my dearest amd much belated mother always taught me was to beware of men wanting to be called "uncle"! Now, did you want something or are you here only to atract attention to yourself? The Countess of Scrotum (De facto) (talk) 21:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Richard D'Oyly Carte[edit]

As a sometime commentator on arts-related articles, I thought you might like to weigh in on the current discussion about infoboxes at this page. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Done [12] and [13], but I should add, in case anyone accuses you of soliciting (probably not the right verb) if the principle content editors really want a box (God knows why they should), they should be allowed to have one. Giacomo Returned 18:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
They call it canvassing here, but any attempt by them to claim that would be baseless here since it was a completely neutral notification. That hasn't stopped some admins in the past from threatening me by accusing me of canvassing, though. Agent VodelloOK, Let's Party, Darling! 18:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Some people here make all sorts of baselss accusations - be like me and rise above - onwards and upwards. Giacomo Returned 19:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. The principal content editors are Ssilvers, Tim riley and Marc Shepherd (mostly retired), all of whom oppose the box. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 12:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
My pleasure. I strongly think the opinions of the principal content editors should always be given priority, without editors who have fixed the typos screaming WP-OWN and other such rubbish. That works both ways regarding info-boxes incidentaly. Giacomo Returned 21:29, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


Replied on my talk page. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 19:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Buckingham Palace (Talk Page)[edit]

Thanks for your latest (6 November 2011) appreciated contribution to this Talk Page as cited, but I have to tell you that in my own opinion the matter is not really so straightforward as you seem to imply. As you know, not everyone reads Wikipedia or indeed the Internet. Further, I have myself made many statements (personally created but based on legally valid documentary evidence which is cited as such by myself and has never at any time been denied by anyone) on certain articles in Wikipedia and elsewhere on the Internet on the same subject matter as here dealt with (architecture and history, including the UK 'listed buildings' as well as other land and war memorials owned by local government, see for instance if you have time the rather longrunning West Hartlepool War Memorial) that relates directly to both local and national government at a European level and I have at the same time on relevant Talk Pages outlined in what I think are clear terms my own view that the publicly available information relating to architecture and history and in particular the First World War memorials, as it is generally available at the present time, is in point of fact contrary, within the UK, to various national and international legislative requirements, and all of this I have done over many years without any response whatsoever from the people directly involved (namely the fully informed local Councils, their officers, and the UK Administrative Court when it was informed upon litigation in person by myself). Thanks again my friend very much, you are one of only a couple of people who have responded at all, but I hope you will understand that I have to repeat that the future is uncertain as a result of what seems to be national politics evidently based on no fewer than two World Wars in the 20th Cent., and now I have to add, in response to what you say, that Wikipedia and the Internet, while much appreciated for their assistance, are apparently not likely finally to resolve these extremely complicated matters at a national and European level and also to repeat that I can unfortunately make no forecasts whatsoever (for I am in effect a person of no particular distinction, and I am and it seems will be rather alone). If you have any questions on this matter please let me know on this Talk Page. Regards and best wishes, Peter Judge 7 November 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

  • My dear Mr Judge, once one starts having to deal with local authorities, the battle is lost I'm afraid - you wouldn't believe the problems I have had over my council tax – what does one get for one's money? One's bin emptied once a fortnight by a gum chewing neo-Marxist and a fused street light! It's not good enough - I have written to Boris Johnson so many time, does he act? No, he does not; just clutters the streets with American and Japanese tourists cycling everywhere – holding up my taxi. It's not good enough. I see you mention the war – don't talk about the war to me – I lived through it; the young of today don't know the meaning of hardship and suffering – I recall the blitz, huddled in an air raid shelter with only my dogs for comfort as the bombs rained down. How St Paul's Cathedral survived God alone knows, and what have we received for our suffering? More nasty little neo-Marxists cluttering up the pavement outside – doing what Hitler failed to do – closing the cathedral! What the late Queen Mother would say, I dread to think. Which brings me neatly to you problem with Buckingham Palace – have you notified Her Majesty? Take my advice and get her on board your crusade – she won't like her home being denigrated by local council employees failing in their duty; I expect half of them are off on paternity leave (they breed like rabbits) and the other half are idling away their time at some protest or strike meeting for the great unwashed or learning how to breast feed at the tax payers expense. Keep the flag flying, Mr Judge. Catherine Rollbacker de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 14:26, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Does this sweet music bring back tender memories, Head Buck Cat de Burgh?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:45, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

The quote now provided by a person (I imagine a lady) Jeanne Bolyen apparently relates to (I quote) A recording of the Carter Gents air-raid sirens and all-clear that would have been a very familiar sound to all civilians in Britain from 1939 - 1945 along with bombing, destroyed cities and thousands killed each night under the heavy bombing raids by the Luftwaffe. I am not sure how this extremely disturbing reference is supposed to relate to what we are discussing other perhaps than by emphasizing the significance from the point of view of actions and memory of the 1939-45 war in relation to the 1914-18? The apparently unrecognized connection of the two wars in respect of the memorials of the first remains I think extremely significant in terms of memorials both east and west and so far as the actions of the Germans that are mentioned are concerned I am sorry but it seems to myself they were probably motivated by what must still have been their vivid recollection of the many thousands of civilians in their own country who died of starvation as a result of the naval blockade by ourselves as from 1914 (something which, so it seems, we who won that war never talk about ourselves?).

Now, to return, Catherine de Burgh, to your own remarks (to which this extraordinary reference does not seem in any way to relate or to reply but possibly I misunderstand it) I thank you indeed for your comments and for your suggestion concerning our wonderful Monarchy. Whether or not I would find it very easy to do what you obviously think I ought to do is certainly, as I do indeed have to admit, in accordance with the requirements of our constitution, given the failure by the elected government to resolve it. What makes me repeat again that I find it difficult is that Her Majesty The Queen may herself find it complicated. I am sure she would agree however that it is something that relates directly to herself and the UK Monarchy and Europe as a whole, together with the Empire and incidentally the Imperial (later Commonwealth) War Graves Commission, now and in the future.

What a problem for a person like myself, but the person who created and therefore to some extent manages this Talk Page (GiacomoReturned) has been helpful in relation to Buckingham Palace on that Talk Page and by his edit of the article. Au revoir, both of you, and we shall perhaps see how it goes, for I repeat once again that in my own opinion the directly relevant historical and architectural facts are for the time being at least undeniable even if never talked about and indeed by some actively suppressed (the architecture together with the documents, currently alas actively misrepresented and mutilated, may of course however eventually, however long it takes, in effect disappear altogether just as many of the Soviet memorials in eastern Europe in our New World have already been altogether destroyed). Now perhaps readers will realize what a sorry problem has confronted me, as a British citizen, for so many years! War is indeed in every respect a nightmare. Peter Judge, 7 November 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with Peter Judge that war is a nightmare. Make Bombs, Not War is my personal motto.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:30, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, and here's a bombe for you all to share. --RexxS (talk) 17:33, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Oh Rex dear, what a sweet and thoughtful boy you are. However, Ms Boleyn, the war was no laughing matter and if you were as old as me, you would know that, having to flee to America to escape persecution was not amusing at all – I was marooned amongst savages. Now on a more topical note, am I the only person to have noticed all these very weird and extremely odd people at the top of the page before one logs in? Who are they? Women and a few men, all in need of a good hairdresser, colourist and stylist all claiming to be Wikipedians who have written millions of pages – Well I am sorry, I have never heard of any of them – a woman who writes about snails – riveting I am sure in some circles, and others writing about computers – I can't imagine they interest anyone at all. Of course, I should have been asked – I have devoted my entire life to charitable causes; I have great experience of fund-raising and charity balls, I am the obvious choice. To have my portrait at the top of Wikipedia would have encouraged a more select type of donor, one can only wonder at Mr Wales' lack of social awareness and PR skills - apparently he lives in London; he needs to get out more. Sincerely yours Catherine Rollbacker de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Anyone who gets this far down the line will perhaps recall that the subjectmatter as first described by myself happened to be "architecture and history, including the UK 'listed buildings' as well as other land and war memorials owned by local government" (with particular reference to the Buckingham Palace and the 'Battle of the Scales' relating to the United Kingdom) and nothing else whatsoever. End of story? If anyone wants to talk about other things, I am sure it will be appreciated by a large number of readers and in any event by myself if they can possibly arrange to do it elsewhere (please see the historically valid definition of 'title' in relation to 'subject'). I am afraid that, rightly or wrongly, this matter, Giacomo Returned, has now (so far as I myself am concerned) to be considered rather at an end so far as this particular Talk Page is concerned (let us, Giacomo Returned, see how it goes elsewhere, and thanks again). Peter Judge 8 November 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections[edit]

Don't forget to nominate yourself as a candidate. Count Iblis (talk) 04:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia has had it's chances to have a dedicated arb in the past, rather than ones promising the world and delivering nothing. I can't be doing with all that nonsense after last year's fiasco and interferences from Jimbo and his sidekicks. I look at the current crew and especially the efforts of last year's trenche and think he got exactly what he deserved and most probably wanted. They may have identified, but apart from preside over a major security leak that's about all they have done. I have more worthy things to do with my time besides which I don't bother too much with Wikipedia at all these days - I'm buggered if I will just churn out content and not be allowed a proper voice. Giacomo Returned 18:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


Hey, Giacomo, is that you? The handsome debonair man conducting the "Halleluja" chorus in the Piazza del Quirinale? It is, isn't it? I knew it! Bishonen | talk 19:46, 13 November 2011 (UTC).

Do you think I would celebrate with some feeble English music? No, this is more my style for such a glorious day [14]. Giacomo Returned 23:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Heh, also very fine, but.. well, even if you are (as seems likely) piloting the leading plane in the formation there, we can't see you, unfortunately. :-( Let me see if I can spot you in some other street scene.. ah, you're in this conga line, aren't you? Lady C, please help me out here: isn't that your dear nephew democratically mingling with the crowd — the tall, striking youth, with the glasses and the irresistible smile ? Bishonen | talk 00:28, 14 November 2011 (UTC).

Scusa il disturbo[edit]

Hi, I thought, you might be the right person to ask. I was writing an entry about the only catholic church in the city of London St Mary Moorfields in German. And it is said here that a certain „Angelo Aglio“ did a huge fresco in the first building. Ma che nome! Mica che ho trovato qualcosa su di lui. Do you have an idea, if this name is correct or what his name could have been? Thanks for any help! :) Saluti Catfisheye (talk) 00:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

No, I have to be honest and say that I have never eard of him - there is a mention of him here [15] and I found this image of the former church where Aglio's freso was File:ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPEL, MOORFIELDS..jpg and even a picture of the said fresco File:ST. MARY MOORFIELDS ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPEL.jpg. Giacomo Returned 10:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
PS: oh dear, how very embarassing; it appears we even have an article on him Agostino Aglio. We all learn something new every day. Giacomo Returned 10:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Ti ringrazio. Sei molto bravo, Gia. Pensavo che il cognome sia sbagliato, allora ho cercato con "fresco", "London" e "Angelo". Cercare con "Aglio" e "fresco" non mi sembrava il caso. :) In a while you'll find also an entry in German about him. Thanks a lot for your help. Catfisheye (talk) 18:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


I moved a couple of photos but it seems that most of the additions had been removed before I got there (and good thing too as most of them were of the Mafra National Palace). I'm sure nowadays there is some whizzy template for organising photos horizontally like that but I'm too lazy to go to look for it. Yomanganitalk 11:05, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, that's a lot better - I still think of that as the 'beautiful page' - quite one of my all-time favourites - it has a lot of happy memories too. Giacomo Returned 19:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

google translate?[edit]

Hi Giano, a vital piece of information on an article (yes a mushroom) I can only find in Italian (which I do not speak). I have written it out and used google translate at Talk:Tricholoma_pardinum#Riva_book_in_Italian. I was hoping you could have a cursory glance and see if google translate goofed anywhere (nothing subject-related, just syntax...) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

"and see if google translate goofed anywhere"? Did you read the translation, Cas? It looks perfect to me. Particularly this bit (which I'd put into the article exactly as it is): "on which BSMF, so very bright states that, after all, not at all revolutionary CHANGE ... from Tiger to Leopard is a short step ... If the species and much written and discussed, stable and well fixed and the 'image of this tricholoma toxic." Yomanganitalk 13:27, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
"My name is Manuel and I learn English from a book" - yes, I know the word order is....err...weird in bits...I guess I mean that I get the general gist of it (I think...)...I was trying to be diplomatic, I wouldn't want google translate to fire off a NPA violation on me...Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:35, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Casliber, do I appear to be the sort of person who is able to talk with authority, in English (or Italian), about mushrooms? If i were, I would have been asked to star in the current adverts on top of the page "I have made 10 trillion edits to Wikipedia about mushrooms; I have long unkempt hair, love little children, the poor and deformed and look like I've been reversed into by a truck and will be doubtless an Arb next year." No wonder, poor Jimbo looks as though he has toothache in the latest images. However, I will take a look, but make no promises as to literacy. Giacomo Returned 21:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
But, but ... Excellency, if you are not an expert on Italian mushrooms, then who on the wiki is? You are of Roman descent and - like the mushrooms and my humble self - kept in the dark and fed on bullshit. Reverently --RexxS (talk) 22:11, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
(chuckle) much appreciated Giano, it's more the rather interesting translation of Italian by Google translate - it seems to have guffed bits, like what does all' mean? Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:14, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
all' means to th', but you may have to replace to by a different proposition and th' by the for better results. Hans Adler 09:08, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
thanks. all this for a really elusive but interesting story...Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Google's translation is certainly a lot more poetic than the original, and full of wisdom. Sometimes I wish Wikipedia had its own R. Maire (1911), defusing tensions between the conservatives and, um, others. Hans Adler 10:10, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't think I will fiddle about with it because I don't know what these odd fungi are called in any language - what are those nice big ones you have in expensive restaurants with miniscule steaks called? I like those. Giacomo Returned 19:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Saint Mary's again[edit]

Hi Gia, St Mary Moorfields will be soon a DYK in the german version, BUT: there is no decent and free picture of the church in the Eldon Street available. Allora scusami per rompere le scatole, but do you know a London-based user here, who has a heart and camera as well? GRAZIE! adesso scappo prima che mi metti fuori. :) Ciao Catfisheye (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Try File:St_Mary_Moorfields.JPG. Risker (talk) 20:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Risker, that looks free enough to me. The whole edifice looks like Selfridge's Baroque, I wonder if there is a connection between the church and the oxford Street store? Giacomo Returned 21:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry forgot to mention, that I know this pic. Some kind people also photoshopped it: File:St Mary Moorfields-2.jpg, but I still won't call it decent. But maybe I am asking to much. :( Gia, I do not fully understand your question but I uploaded a floor plan of this church. It is an aesthetical shame, that they sold the land and laid down the first building. Sherrin, the architect of the second building is known for the Routings Store in the Kensington High Street as well as two stations. Why they gave him this project? They did not care a lot after builing the Westminster Cathedral or how? Ok, it's not fair, to hold on truth, Sherrin also worked on the Brompton Oratory Dome, but the "facade" in Eldon Street... Aye, I stop whining. Catfisheye (talk) 00:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Draft template[edit]

Hi, I noticed you at NewPages and see that you're working on a draft of another article! May I suggest using {{Userspace draft}}? It'll keep the search engines out of your draft pages. Cheers, Melchoir (talk) 11:16, 26 November 2011 (UTC) That's very useful than kyou, I have quite a few drafts that coul use that; I'll put it on then right away many thanks. Giacomo Returned 11:21, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

labile mushrooms???[edit]

Hi Giano (and Hans who has graciously tweaked Talk:Tricholoma_pardinum#Riva_book_in_Italian thus far)- one query. the adjective "labile" must have some other meanings in Italian, as I am sorry but I cannot imagine a mushroom as "labile" in the English sense by any stretch of the imagination and am at a loss as to what it might mean....(see the very last sentence) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

It means it has a short time to live, or is very fragile and delicate. I didn't know 'labile' meant anything in the English sense, allthough my mind is leading me an a filthy direction, but that is probably my mind. Giacomo Returned 11:31, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm, in psychiatry a labile mood is a term used in bipolar disorder for a mood with exaggerated expressions (laughing and crying in short succession etc.). "Fragile/delicate" makes sense in the segment of text...Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:19, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Ooh well that sums up half the Arbcom then; I like to have new adjectives for them up my sleeve when required. Giacomo Returned 12:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
(chuckle) that made me laugh, and I do need some of those at the moment....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:40, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I finished the translation, but please take everything con un grano di sale. The big advantage of never actually having learned a language other than by singing in it is that it's a lot more fun to translate. (Oh, and I think "labile" in this case means that the case for the second variety isn't as strong as for the first.) Hans Adler 12:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I really don't understand this preoccupation that you all have with mushrooms; at one time people discussed art and literature on this page or at least how to have me unblocked because some labilic little Admin had gone off his head; now all we have is fungi. I shall go back to my editing. Giacomo Returned 12:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, your talk page sometimes plays the role of the kitchen during a party, where all the fun happens although nobody is supposed to be there. But if the possible culinary applications of a "large, attractive mushroom [...] having a pleasant smell and taste" but causing "a severe, persistent gastroenteritis" don't make the topic palatable to you, then I guess we shouldn't keep activating your orange bar. Sorry for the interruptions; this will be the last one from me. Hans Adler 13:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
And me just about everything I read it is Englisch über alles but for mycology, where there is a great deal of material in foreign, a group of languages at which I flounder. Hans I think the meaning of "uncertain/less certain" makes sense too. And that subspecies has been devilishly hard to find any material or sources on at all! And thus I bid arrivederci as well.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Why would anyone want to eat a mushroom that would give them "persistent gastroenteritis"? Giacomo Returned 16:08, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
These ones are large and meaty-looking, and (I guess) they just look appetizing - they do resemble some edible ones. I was intrigued that one variety of them smells/tastes like cucumber....and some folks.....oh look, I don't know, people are strange, but not as daring as the Finnish who eat this one....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh Scandinavians, they will eat anything - even rotting fish is a treat for them. Giacomo Returned 23:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Maybe so, but since when did the Finns become Scandinavians? Dr. Dan (talk) 18:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
If it eats like a Viking, speaks Swedish like a Viking, and has horns on its helmet, it's quite probably an inaccurate stereotype. But that's near enough for this page. --RexxS (talk) 19:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
As far as I can remember this specific forum strives for perfection rather than "near enough". Perhaps I am mistaken. In any case, I think the inhabitants of the West Midlands are more akin to Scandinavians than the Finns (5% who speak Swedish) are, and many of those inhabitants are fond of marmite which in my opinion is closer in taste to rotting fish than the pictured fungus. Dr. Dan (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
  • The inhabitants of the West Midlands have nothing to do with this - ghastly people who speak unintelligible, nasal English and were mostly born in horrible places like Birmingham and Coventry. No, anyone who has ever sailed their yachts and harpooned sturgeon in the Baltic will know of Fennoscandia which quite clearly decrees Finland to Scandinavia. What is more, Dr Dan (I don't trust doctors; why anyone wants to chop people up for a living I can't imagine) I rather think I am more locally placed to know these things than you. Catherine Rollbacker de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Arbcom elections[edit]

Hi there. You seem to be holding aloof from the arb elections. Have you formed an opinion? Bishonen | talk 15:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC).

I had not realy noticed that the elections were going on, but since you ask I just had a look. Apart from the same old crew trying to hang on to magical powers, I don't beleive I know any of the others - perhaps they are new to the project. One amusing, think is poor old FT2 still wandering about in the wilderness beating his breast, and Coren on his questions page, saying that the Arbs were unhappy and Risker says on her questions page that they did not know until 2010. What bollox, they were all covering up all of the time, I seem to remember the pretended shock, horror and outrage in 2008 when I posted diffs on the subject [16]. here's a taste of the shock, horror and denial of knowing. As for poor old Coren, I seem to remember him telling me I was mental [17] when another ex-Arb was up to no good, and then trying to have that oversighted. I don't think I shall bother to vote, there's nothing to chose between the lot of them. Giacomo Returned 16:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Such a big palace ...[edit]

... must have plenty of space for a coatrack. I guess that's what User:Diginerd84 (editing on behalf of Bell Pottinger Group) thought. Have you seen Blenheim Palace recently? I was quite surprised to find it on this list. Hans Adler 16:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

And plenty of breakfast rooms for the serving of spam on toast. Diginerd has been indefblocked as a confirmed sockpuppet. Bishonen | talk 19:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC).
True enough; however, it is probably a valid point to include the fact that Blenheim Palace *does* have a "construction arm". Now if only it could be sourced to something other than an estate agent's advert... Risker (talk) 19:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I am surprised it took so long to see he was a sock. People do not say "I live in Mayfair" - unless they are pimps, socks, some kind of foreign oligarch or children playing Monopoly. People say "I have a house in Hanover Square/Curzon Street/Berkley Square etc. Catherine Rollbacker de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Oh shudder; not only do we have Mr Wales commenting, but a queue forming to opine: David Gerard, a UK-based spokesperson and volunteer for Wikipedia, told the BBC..... No doubt we shall have Admiral Nelson, Napoleon Buonaparte and the Archangel Gabriel chipping in with their views next. They should cut off the oxygen and extra publicity and be quiet. Catherine Rollbacker de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
"Wikipedia, which has grown into one of the web's most popular destinations since being founded 10 years ago, is edited by a huge number of volunteers who follow an agreed set of rules." – This is a PR dream for us. The press is beginning to understand, and explain, how Wikipedia works. They even have a link to WP:COI in the article. And people are getting the message that manipulating Wikipedia can backfire. Hans Adler 22:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I think you're right. Malleus Fatuorum 03:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
...and you feel those spokespersons present the right PR image for Wikipedia? Giacomo Returned 18:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I see that the matter is being discussed by the usual appologists here [18]. Giacomo Returned 10:51, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
I tend to not care about who is doing PR work for Wikimedia, so long as the overall results are good. Just like I don't care all that much who is doing the menial jobs such as deleting pages, blocking users or holding arbitration court, so long as they are intelligent enough to do it reasonably well. (Of course sometimes they aren't and cause problems.) Hans Adler 15:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Well I am am a spent force and ancient history here now, almost a retired editor, but that does not mean my old instincts, judgements and ability to prophesy have entirely deserted me. Wikipedia never learns and there's trouble ahead with all these 'employees' and rag-tag 'spokespeople' - the new Arbcom will doubtless be the usual rag bag of odds and sods amounting to nothing and falling off along the way - Everything is just so very second rate and it's all so very sad and unecessary - there is no one in charge with the panache and brain to hire and fire and get to grips with the project. Giacomo Returned 22:39, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
  • True, true. Wikipedia is big enough now that it needs some professional leadership. The WMF probably should get it going now before a big crisis forces them to make a belated attempt at it. Cla68 (talk) 22:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Courtesy notification ...[edit]

... that I may have mentioned your name here: meta:Talk:Terms of use#The Giano sanction. If I have offended or misrepresented your self, Excellency, please let me know. --RexxS (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem at all Rex. I expect these things are al dreamt up by the same Fred Bauder/Coren/Loshkin type of people. Shoot the messenger, leave the problem and respect your betters has always been the Wikipedia song. It's why I completely ignored the elections this year - behind the scenes, nothing/no one ever changes here.Giacomo Returned 15:21, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
I have just read the latest offerings to that section and have no idea how to log in and respond, and have no wish to show them my (allthough I dare say one of the checkusers will provide it from here) so perhaps Rex, you would care to paste this in on my behalf:
"before undertaking such activities"!!! when I told the arbitartion committe about it and the attendant risk, there was the most evil and pernicious persecution of me that it's possible to imagine - had I not, at the time been a very high profile editor, they would have buried me alive; they did not care a a stuff about the security risk, there only concern was not looking stupid themselves and having my discoveries made public. Such was my disgust at the emails and threats I received from one Knight Largo acting as the Arbcom's cheif inquisitor and various arbs, I have never trusted any of them again and have largely withdrawn from the project. They are not fit to be in charge of private information and anyone who has voted this year for certain Arbs to be retained wants their bloody heads testing. Giacomo Returned 19:28, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
I've done that for you, and hopefully you will allow me a little licence to point out what I felt were the salient points. We'll see if there are responses.
By the way, now that we have Unified login across projects, I think you will be automatically logged in to meta. You can see your status on other projects on the page linked below:
If you're unsure though, you can always see if you're logged in on any particular project because you'll see your name, talk, preferences, etc. in the top right as usual (although some may be red-links). Let me know if you get problems, and I'll see if I can sort them (or Jack will, as he's expert with the technicalities of logon to other wikis). Your obedient etc. --RexxS (talk) 23:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • It does not seem to want to log me in, however, I'm not that bothered. Nothing will change with or without any imput from me. I see the Arbcom has just become even sillier and even less cerdible than it was before (if that's possible); I am almost begining to feel sorry for Risker - it can't be easy for her - I am thinking of opening a book to see when and who will be the first one to fall off the perch and be found on the bottom of the cage. Personally, I fail to understand what can be so pressured about it or why people have so little understanding of their own future timetable and/or mental state. It either shows a certain lack of organisation or a huge overwillingness to put oneself in the limelight. Giacomo Returned 14:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
  • There are a few nice additions to and subtractions from the team --Guerillero | My Talk 23:50, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Malleus and Giacomo seem to think wiki powers that be and members of cabals are totally corrupted and untrustworthy; and I agree. PumpkinSky talk 00:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Frohliche Weinachten und Gluckliches neues Jahr[edit]

Christbaumschmuck an einer Nordmanntanne (fotografiert in Baden-Wurttemberg, Deutschland)

Photo from Baden_Wurttemberg, Germany.PumpkinSky talk 13:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh God or, possibly, O Dio![edit]

Dear Giacomo, hello again from the seldom seen FClef in an unseasonably mild Britain. It's been an age, I know, and we are having an unseasonably warm post-Christmas shopping sales frenzy. I hope that you enjoyed a magical Christmas and will have a Happy New Year.

Meanwhile, I have got into something of a mess with my limited Wikipedia knowledge, and I am imploring you to rescue me (get your white charger ready).

Here are the awful details. PROBLEM 1 - new category created; should be a subcategory of an existing category but owing to my hamfistedness and general procedural ignorance, it isn't.

  • I created a new category: here
  • I intended to make it a subcategory of : this parent category
  • But I didn't know how to.
  • I used the guidlines in the last paragraph here, BUT
  • On creating the page, I was thrown into an "Edit" screen and there seemed to be no facility of making it a subcategory. No options were given for putting it under a parent category.

Please can you do this? It is floating around somewhere as a major category.


  • the desired parent category falls within this Project, which only refers to CHILDREN in its guidelines.
  • The definition at the top of the Project page should be broadened to include the word "animals."

Please can you do this? don't worry if not; it can still be a subcat of this and I will communciate with the Talk page on the Project.


  • It should also be a subcategory of this parent category if you are still conscious at this point . . .

Please can you do this? (Pretty please . . . &c., &c.)

If you can do this, you will be right up there in my book with Santa. If not, I will appreciate any suggestion you can give or any intermediation you can provide with an Admin. You may reply to my Talk page, or I will watch here. With very best wishes, FClef (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The last "magical" Christmas that I enjoyed was as a student many moons ago - and very magical it was too. I'm afraid that I have never knowingly created a sub-category, but many people watching this page have domne so, so if no one has sorted you out in a few hours come back and i will find someone who does know how. Happy new year to you. Giacomo Returned 23:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Hey, FClef. Not sure Giacomo is editing any too much during the holidays. Oh, there you are, G, edit conflicting me? No problem, I've already typed my reply.
Problem 1: To make your new Category:Abandoned animals a subcat of Category:Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement, you treat your Category:Abandoned animals in exactly the same way as you would an article page: put [[Category:Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement]] at the bottom of the page. That will put your new cat in Cat:Adoption etc, which thereby becomes its parent. Or I can do it, no problem.
Problem 2: sorry, I'm not sure I'm following you. You want the WikiProject to have a more inclusive name? That's something you must discuss on the project itself. The project talkpage is indeed the place to propose an expansion of the project and a new name for it. If you get general agreement to your proposal, any experienced user there can "move" it to a new name — doesn't have to be an admin.
Problem 3: You want Category:Abandoned animals to be placed in Category:Animal welfare as well? Also no problem, you can add any number of appropriate parents to your new cat's page in the same way as I described under 1 — just the way you'd add multiple cats to an article page. Or I'll stick 'em in; just let me know. Regards, Bishonen | talk 23:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC).
Thanks to both of you for replies. I was "bold" (like being a newbie again) and managed to subcat according to your instructions, Bishonen. I will clarify Problem 2 to your Talk page - although actually I will take it up with the Project Talk page - so as not to disturb Giacomo's post-prandial port and Stilton (I am presuming we are all vegging out on that at the moment?) Cheers!FClef (talk) 23:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


Hi Giano. We recently got a puppy (brownchocolate lab) and I was wondering if you have any suggestions about how to be a good dog owner. Hope you are well despite the passel of inlaws. Jehochman Talk 19:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Oh I treat them like the children, spoil them and shout at them depending on my mood and allow them to become ferral; they all seem to love me just the same. Giacomo Returned 22:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • There are no "brown" labradors... there are liver coloured ones, same as the yellow ones are called "golden". I am very much afraid that you have committed a faux pas (beige with darker spots, I believe) as regards dog ownership etiquette. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
The best thing you can do is get a second labrador, preferably from the same litter. It's only when you see how a pair of dogs work and play together that you realise that a dog on its own is incomplete. Take my word on this, you won't regret it. --RexxS (talk) 01:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, they are called chocolate labradors - and they are brilliant gun dogs, very good in water - which means you don't need a badly behaved spaniel, so can have a black labrador for picking up - which makes a very nice contrasting pair. They will also make you appear very grand as they stare in a very superior way out of the back of your car on the motorway. Giacomo Returned 08:46, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, chocolate, and she does like water. There is plenty in New England, where it has been constantly rainy, snowy, flooded and muddy in recent years. We had two Great Danes when I was a boy, then a Dobermann. The two dogs were happier than the one. Jehochman Talk 12:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Cute baby[edit]

Honey, I admire your fine new baby category Category:British country houses destroyed in the 20th century, but it needs some parents. How about Category:Former country houses in the United Kingdom, for a start? Parenting is done in the way I explained to FClef in the O Dio! thread above. Warning: I see you have added your new cat to a number of articles. That's fine. But remember that if you do parent it as I suggest (and if you don't, I will, one of these fine days), the parent cat will need removing from all those pages. A fun little job. Yes, creating categories has repercussions, you can't just leave them on the steps of the orphanage. Bishonen | talk 13:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC).

I am afraid that I had a perfectly good category before which was wantonly and stupidly deleted without my knowledge over Christmas [19], see my comments here and here no doubt Risker and the Arbs are too busy tring to ban productive editors for being rude than instilling the basic manners to "others" which include notifying people that categories thay have created (and in that case almost single handedly writen) are about to be deleted. Anyway the new category, about this very important subject, as you can see is going to be far larger as I always intended. The parent category you suggest is actually the old category has been deleted and wrongly renamed; the old name was completely correct, but apparently I am forbiden to name the new category after it or I wil be banned too. Now, what you can tell me is how to make the name of a village appear in the category section under a different name ie: the page Poynton appear in the category page as "Poynton Towers". I am having to skip loads of such pages in my anxiety to prove the importance of the subject befpre some peurile, ignorant baby admin from God knows where comes and deletes the category again or blocks me. Thank you. Giacomo Returned 13:34, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Excellency: I've re-written the introduction to your earlier category that was renamed into something different. It is now suitable as a parent category for your new baby, and I have arranged for the adoption. This is not something that you need worry about. No doubt some of the editors who thought it a good idea to massively broaden the earlier category will be equally delighted to go around cleaning up the double categorisations that their efforts will have created. Again, this is not something you need worry about. Although it's hard to believe sometimes, Wikipedia is a collaborative enterprise (!), and normal service will be resumed in the near future as these small kinks in the process work themselves out.
I'm not sure what the problem is with "Poynton" vs "Poynton Towers" and I can't see in your contribution history where you encountered the problem, but if you could be a little more specific, I'll do my best to sort it for you. Your etc. --RexxS (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you Rex, one can only assume these people have nothing better to do than meddle with things that they don't understand. You won't see the problem because I have not done it. When I preview Poynton Towers on the Poynton page all I get is "hidden categories" - I thought that was the way it had to be done, I'm sure I have done that in the past. thank you for your help. Giacomo Returned 14:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Doubly thank you Rex, I have just seen your edit here. It's amazing isn't it that none of them even bothered to lok at the page and spot that qualifying text. I'm stil at a loss to understand how something that is "nothing" (ie razed from the planet) can be "former." A lunatic asylum can be a former country house, but thin air can never ne anything other than thin air. I do wonder if these people even understand their own language someties. Giacomo Returned 14:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)