User talk:PiCo/Archive 1

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



===>Tell me more I'd love to hear more about you being in MINURSO. If you have the time and energy e-mail me. Thanks. Justin (koavf) 04:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Project visual arts[edit]

hi PiCo, If you're interested in art you may wish to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts and sign your name in the list of participants.. its not very active at the moment, but maybe it will become more active in the future. Also should say that you mentioned about putting up illustrations, its important that theyre not copyright images. well hope you have fun here :) Cfitzart 15:09, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


Hi I just noticed the links on Charles Blackman dont work.. when creating a link after you click the button 'external link' above you have to change the text "" to the adress you want. Hope that helps. Theres also a guide to it here -- Wikipedia:External links --- Cfitzart 12:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


The Barnstar of High Culture

I, Gaff talk hereby bestow The Barnstar of High Culture
to PiCo for particularly fine art-related contributions.

Lloyd Rees[edit]

Hi the problem with the image is that the filename is case sensitive, including the jpg at the end. So Image:A South Coast Road.jpg uses lower case jpg whereas Image:Lloyd rees south coast road.JPG has an uppercase JPG. If youre going to add images of art which are copyrighted that youre claiming fair use on, you should type {{art}} to use the art template. If you had wanted to revert, you click on the history tab, click on the older version, then click edit and save. (it will give you a warning about editing an older version) Cfitzart 02:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Alternative titles to articles[edit]

Hey, great editing on Amor Vincit Omnia (I was the one who had the story wrong on the relationship between Caravaggio, Baglione, and that bishop whose name I didn't know). By the way, if there is an alternative title to an article that you think people might search on wikipedia, you can redirect from that title to the article which has that title's content by using Wikipedia:Redirect. For instance, you could start a new article at Amor Vincit, with the content of the article being only #REDIRECT [[Amor Vincit Omnia]]. The same type of thing could be done at Boy Peeling Fruit. An example of the result can be found by going to Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (to see what happens, look here [1] and here [2]). Please feel free to add these, and other articles for alternative titles to art works, and just type "rd" and the name of the other title in the subject line (i.e. "rd Amor Vincit Omnia").Smmurphy 05:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)


[3.47] She said: My Lord! when shall there be a son (born) to I me, and man has not touched me? He said: Even so, Allah creates what He pleases; when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, Be, and it is.

--Striver 13:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Edit Summary[edit]

Hey, I just wanted to let you know that some people make a big deal out of edit summaries and user pages. I have found you to be a great user, but there are those who feel the reputation of a user stems from their use of edit summaries and such. It isn't too important as long as you are editing reneissance art articles, as most other editors of those articles recognize you and trust your contributions, but if/when you edit other articles, the edit summaries will increase the amount of trust other editors have in your edits. Also, feel free to mark edits as minor if you feel that they are, this too helps other editors recognize what kind of edit you have made. Of course, feel free to ignore my advice. Keep up the great edits! Smmurphy(Talk) 18:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't take that to mean that you should stick to art. The only subject I really know anything about is math, and I hardly make any edits there (and I think my math and non-math work is appreciated). I liked your edit to Biblical inerrancy, and if you would like to discuss that edit with the editors there, they would be happy to. I think since you didn't give a summary and you don't have a user page, it was easier for the editors there to decide to revert it. It doesn't mean it was bad, or as they said, POV (point of view), just that the comment wasn't given a source or an explanation. Plus, they say that teaching a subject is the best way to learn it, likewise editing (and especially resolving edit conflicts) a WP topic is a great way to learn more about it. So I say summarize and diversify! Smmurphy(Talk) 21:42, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I've gone back to BI and added a long-ish comment on the discussion page on how the piece can be improved. But I really don't want to spend too much time on that topic - art is more interesting :).

Cool, you are probably right though, editors on pages like that will never find a neutral way to tell their story. Smmurphy(Talk) 03:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Cerasi Chapel cats[edit]

Sure, no prob! :) Szyslak (Szyslak sig.png [ +t, +c, +m, +e ]) 07:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


Yes, that makes sense about copyright. Merry Christmas to you! 40px Cfitzart 07:21, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that[edit]

I'm sorry to hear you're leaving. I hope you will eventually find your way back to us; all the best. - RoyBoy 800 00:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


Hello, PiCo, thanks for your message. The only way to move the images to commons is to reupload them here. The easiest thing is to just copy and paste the raw text of the image description page from Wikipedia into Commons. Then, the Wikipedia image has to be listed at WP:IFD. I've started doing them, based on this list, which I've just been going through in order starting with the most recent. So far, I've done:

I'll do a bunch more later, maybe late tonight (EST). Do you still have the original images on your computer? If so, that would make it a bit quicker for you--I've been downloading them and then uploading them. It's easy to set up an account at Commons here. OK, I'll be back. Chick Bowen 16:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank You & Keep Going[edit]

Hi PiCo, Great to get a second welcoming message from another wikipedian. I think I will follow in your footsteps and become a little addicted also....

I am a big fan of Somerset Maugham (and a collector with some 80 or more of his books, plays, short story and mini-story collections most of which are first edition and even a signed copy or two).

I did see in the history the mini discussion you had with someone about his sex-life. I also could not care less in terms of my POV about what his sex life was but I do care in terms of just stating the facts - hence my indicating that he had an affair with Syrie his future wife - which probably shows not only a strange sexual derring-do (I mean if he was struggling with his sexuality as many people do why not just 'pick up' for the night not marry, produce a child etc.) I have uncovered at least one other love relationship with a woman before Syrie that I will put up later. Indeed Syrie was apparently quite notorious in terms of her love affairs also and perhaps this put a strain on their marriage. On the other hand it is possible that Willie - notoriously shy, enormous stuttering problem etc - sought someone's love and finding it with Haxton moved from a rather bi-sexual frame of mind to the more pronounced homosexual tendency. (Sounds a bit like Elton John?) I have also found some tremendous material about his swimming nude with Harpo Marx - again I will put that up later - but I do not think that it shows that he had a relationship with Harpo.

Sorry I digress. I will write a little more (well okay perhaps a lot more) about his writing style, whether he was serious or not, and certainly about Lady Frederick which in fact he had written as his second play but kept hidden away until 1907 when it was produced at the Court Theatre and gave him instant fame - but I thought I might do that with lead-offs to his actual books as his writing style differs, at times dramatically from book to book - at least from my readings of the vast majority of them.

Anyway I thank you again for your lovely welcoming message. In return I note that you seem to be struggling a little mentally with your desire to remain an avid contributor. I suggest you continue (which it seems you are doing at least on weekends) on the basis that it seems to me that Wikipedia gives back as much as it gets from any avid contributor and that the pursuit of knowledge is a worthy use of anyone's free time. VirtualSteve 23:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Attilio Guarracino[edit]

So glad you have relented! Would appreciate any thoughts or ideas you may have on this page Attilio Guarracino

Lentisco 05:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I got most of my info from the unforgetable DF diaries. Youre right about the suburb he lives in--though remarkably he is in the Melb telephone directory!--so Ill scrub it. There is nothing I would like more than to interview AG-but I think that it would be invading his privacy--he has had an amazing life especially his first thirty years. Lets hope he writes his own biog before he dies! I reckon he warrants an entry just for the sheer number of remarkable people he mixed with as well as the fact he is the subject of so many portaits. Perhaps you could contact him? Im a coward at heart! Lentisco 02:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you about the difference between DF & JS. From his biog JS comes across as dull, repressed and obsessed with property and share values. This is clearly seen in their respective art outputs-there is NO life and few people in JS pictures-- the antithesis of DF! Both DF or AG would make excellent biog subjects. If you decide to one or the other-may I be your assistant? Im literate and in DESPERATE need of paid employment (even if its one hour a week)!Lentisco 03:17, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your sage advice. Lentisco 04:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


You might want to look at this...

Jim62sch 11:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

A pain is an understatement. His personal attacks are legendary, and I've been on the shit end of more than a few. To me, Ben is a pestilence, and a person whose opinion I value less than a warm bucket of hamster spit. I suppose that sounds harsh, but it's honest. A look at the archives on various pages, or looking up his history of edit and reading the comments would be a bit of an eye-opener.
BTW, the Ark article is really coming together nicely! Take care, Jim62sch 01:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


Gopher is looking problematic. I'll explain later. Jim62sch 17:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Ark article.[edit]

Good job on the part about the Mesopotamian myth.--Rob117 16:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

See my latest addition.  :) 13:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


Do you mean that the NGA bought it from the same source that the Getty bought the things which are claimed to be stolen as in this story [3] ??? Cfitzart 13:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Caravaggio feature nomination[edit]

Hi PiCo! I've nominated Caravaggio for a featured article. Thanks so much for your contributions to the article and the paintings articles. >>sparkit|TALK<< 04:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Chess match[edit]

Sorry for the late reply to your move. I was convinced also modifications to my main pages was comunicated through the "You have new messages" tag. I was wrong, of course! Let me know and thanks! Attilios P.S.: I'm also a fan of the Caravaggio article. I think it's very good, and, together with all the paintings sub-articles, it's the true proof we can do FAR better than traditional encyclopedias. If you're interested, there's the Raphael Rooms article that needs some help.


Will you weigh in on Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Someone has made some changes to the wording and now they have been reverted. To prevent an edit war, we need a reasonable fourth party who is online now to judge if the changes are reasonable or deserve a reversion. Can you help? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 03:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

References for Caravaggio[edit]

Hi. I thought I'd reply to your offer to help with the Caravaggio cites here rather than oin the Caravaggio page, just in case you never go look there :). I've now added citations for almost all the direct quotes - a few are still blank, and if I can't find the sources I'll simply edit round them somehow. Apart from that, you could just look through the article and mark anything you feel needs a citation - just add [4] or something, with a matching blank in the Footnotes section. Then I can come back and try to find a good reference. I have Lambert (contains lots of secondary quotes that I haven't found elsewhere), Robb (use with caution but very readable and actually quite a lot of scholarship behind him), Puglisi (scholarly but slightly outdated), Langdon (same as for Puglisi), and Gash (pretty damn good). Should be able to find something from that lot. Plus I guess I could always go visit a library :). PiCo 12:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad to do that. I suppose I could go to the library, too. ;>) >>sparkit|TALK<< 18:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi again! Here's what I added (wikipedia doesn't make this easy, eh?)
  • note|Minniti - something general about relationship with Minniti
  • note|Cardsharps - new theme, attracting attention of Francesco Maria Del Monte, popularity
  • note|homoerotic - The opinion that his images are homoerotic. (or is it in the eyes of the 21st century viewer?)
  • note|vulgar - citation of perception of vulgarity, as well as appreciation
  • note|Ceccho - something general about Ceccho
  • note|Syracuse_to_Messina_to_Polermo - citiation about the trip
  • note|bizarre_behavior - attribution
  • note|Naples - persued by enemies, on to Naples
  • note|David_to_Borghese - giving David painting to Borghese
  • note|death_uncertainties - stories of his death
  • note|models - the prostitues - maybe Minniti and Checcho could go here, too
  • note|himself_as_model - who first says he used himself for a model

>>sparkit|TALK<< 15:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

You probably are right about Caravagio's birthday. I have seen a lot of of sources listing it as the 29th, and you've probably researched it much more than I have. I'm actually kind of glad you pointed it out.--Mechever 04:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

At last I finished the footnotes to Caravaggio. I don't know if it's what you had in mind, but the footnotes now must be the longest for any article on Wikipedia! My problem is I could go on writing forever. Just have to force myself to stop. Any comments? PiCo 13:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, PiCo. I don't know that it has a record number of footnotes but it's up there. ;) And they certainly cover enough of the article to ensure "credibility." I'll proofread it again. Would you like to submit it again for a featured article? Again, thanks for writing so much about an artist I so enjoy. >>sparkit|TALK<< 05:02, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: FAC[edit]

Thank you for your message; I'll review it when I look at all the FACs again. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Noah's Ark featured article candidate[edit]

It's been spell-checked. I even left that atrocious Commonwealth spelling alome. ;) Jim62sch 13:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

PiCo, I hadn't actually looked at the Noah's Ark article for a while, except for seeing which sections were being edited from my watchlist... it's come a long way. I think you do a great job integrating, expanding and reworking the natural history stuff that I started. If the rest of the article is that good (I'll read the whole current version when I get a chance), then I'll definitely support it for FA. Great job!--ragesoss 16:20, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

The current article looks pretty good - for the longest time I thought it would never reach any kind of stability, but it looks good now. Codec 19:25, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for the very good edits you've done on the article. JoshuaZ 22:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


Good luck with your search, thats a shame that they are banning photographs. I didnt know about that but I have already taken photos of many of the artworks there for my own use Cfitzart 09:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC) --Mechever 04:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary[edit]

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 41% for major edits and 61% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 03:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Godfrey Blow[edit]

Hi, re. your request on Godfrey Blow talk page, try Stuckism! best Tyrenius 09:03, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Great article! Thanks for the pointer. PiCo 09:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and check out the latest on Talk: Stuckism in Australia. Far from writing articles on the subject, User:AYArktos wants to delete one! Tyrenius 09:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm strongly in favour of keeping the article - first because God knows one more article isn't going to cost Wiki a fortune in bandwidth, and then because i's a genuine contemporary art movement, part of modern high culture (I loved the image of the two Chinese artists jumping up and down on Tracy Enim's bed in the name of Art!). I'll add a comment on that page. You could also approach user Cfitzart, who is an art historian and would have some more background than I do. PiCo 10:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope my contribution on the talk page has settled things down. Best Tyrenius 21:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Stavisky Affair[edit]

Hi. Sorry for the delay, it appears that the database was locked. What I had tried to do for the page was to "marry" your info with what was on the French version page. You'll notice I have only changed to fit new stuff in a logical pattern (I did not want o just throw it in there). I think that citing a contemporary source in full was a great idea, but I also feared that the article as such seemed a bit too Americanocentric. I had also done work on articles on French fascism, and wanted to give a unitary feel to the whole thing (place it in context etc.). But you'll notice that virtually all of what you wrote there is still in place. Dahn 23:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for asking. Dahn 00:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Split the Caravaggio page[edit]

Sounds good. You're obviously well informed on the subject. I agree. Palx 09:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Willie's nomination time?[edit]

I posted this on Willie's discussion page today. What do you think?

  • I think we are about ready to nominate this article for Featured Article status now and wait for the input of other editors. As you will see I have adjusted the Searle quote - I just couldn't find the Coward link so I thought it better to remove. Give me your thoughts and then we can put it up if you agree. VirtualSteve.pngVirtualSteve 10:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary[edit]

"rv - B's version is sub-literate (he can't write English)" [5] Please just describe your edit narrowly and succinctly. In no case is it appropriate to critique another editor's writing ability, in the edit summary or anywhere else. Tom Harrison Talk 18:57, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Eve (first woman)[edit]


The outcome of the vote on merging [[Eve (first woman) with Adam and Eve:

Support. Don't think that a seperate article needs to be opened. Each person was a unique character, but since they are almost always discussed together, a seperate article is redundant. --Shuki 11:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC) Oppose as the wording in that article is inflammatory, can be seen as misogynistic and POV, and not needed in this article. Jim62sch 11:45, 15 March 2006 (UTC) Create a redirect from there to Adam and Eve page, merge any useful material, ignore any myth=fact nonsense. — Dunc|☺ 12:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC) Redirect and merge per Dunc. FeloniousMonk 18:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC) Redirect and merge - most of the Eve Original Woman article is not worth keeping PiCo 07:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC) You might not think that "support" and "oppose" can end up meaning the same thing, but in this case they do. Nobody wants two articles. The "merge" part, well, I think nobody sees anything worth merging. So, can I just delete the content off that page (maybe with a note that it's been decided to merge with A&E) and add a "redirect"? Or is that sort of thing not encouraged in Wikiland? Do we need to ask/tell and admin? PiCo 06:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll ask KillerChihuahua...I'm not sure that poll is binding anyway as there was no clear cut consensus and very few people voting. Jim62sch 10:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Judea or Galilee?[edit]

Actually, in the Gospels Jesus spent most of his time in Galilee and Iudea, passing through Perea and Samaria. Here's a map: [6]. It's the same piece of real estate as modern Israel, Palestine and Jordan. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 07:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but the point I was making was about time rather than geography - Jesus was several centuries too late to go anywhere in ancient Israel. PiCo 07:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I should have said this before, but I think a map would help with both time and geography. Do you know of a good map of the area as it existed in the first century, a map that we could use without violating copyright? Grigory Deepdelver AKA Arch O. LaTalkTCF 23:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Verrocchio and Correggio[edit]

Hi! I see that you contribute regularly to the Caravaggio article. I think this article is the demonstration that WP can be far better than traditional enciclopeadias like Britannica. However, I've noticed that WPìs Verrocchio and Correggio articles are by far less informed than my Britannica ones. i've already added some info abouth Correggio's youth: however, English is not my mother language and I found difficulties. Can you contribute to them? Let me know. Thanks. Attilios 12:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC).

I'm off on a 2-month trip overseas from the end of this month and won't be able to do anything. But when I come back, sure. In the meantime I'll have a look at the Coreggio article and tidy up the English for you. (Wish I could speak Italian - I love Italy). PiCo 12:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


Barbara Shack 15:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)Thanks for the Wittgenstein quote on your user page. I’ve put it into the People speculated to have been autistic article under, Historical figures who displayed behavioral patterns associated with the autistic spectrum.

The sound of /ch/ and French[edit]

I was interested to read your comment on the Talk:Noah's Ark page regarding the regional variations of the pronunciation of /ch/. I would love to know more about it. You can leave it on my talk page or email me. I am an English teacher from the US (currently in Mexico) who loves languages and wishes he were a philologist, linguist, and polyglot (two languages so far!). Maybe someday. --Cromwellt|Talk 17:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello again. Thank you for that explanation. It was exactly the kind of thing I was looking for. Don't worry about not knowing much about linguistics: you gave me what I was after.  :D I hope you have an extraordinary day. Happy editing! --Cromwellt|Talk 14:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

How to get from Noah to Enoch and back[edit]

If you have a Doctorate in modern Semitic languages, you should be able to see that the remainder backwards is Enoch, not Onah. We're talking about the Hebrew here, not the English.PiCo 22:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, Hebrew. Enoch is חֲנוֹךְ. Let's remove the final letter. We get חֲנו (ħano). Phonetically that backwards is onaħ: which is the result also if you revert the Hebrew letters, unless you regard the vav as merely a vowel marking on the n, which is what you must be doing. But that's not putting the letters themselves backwards. In any case, 'merely' deleting a final letter and inverting the remainder does not make words 'very similar'. I wouldn't class 'butter' as very similar to 'tub' (doing phonemics here, not orthography): and that's more similar than the above. Somewhat similar, a little, may be. --Drmaik 16:09, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


Hi Pico, that is interesting, I am going to look up what country Kuala Lumpur is in, since I can't recall at the moment... Well if you look a bit further, I didn't even write that bit about Khoda, in fact I don't care for it at all, since it contradicts the part above, and I tend to think the word comes from a deified chieftain of the Getae tribe called Geat personally, but I was the one who added the fact template and restored it when someone else tried to remove it... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 23:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Well some of your suggestions for changing the article sound like they might have potential merit, but if there's one thing I've learned in my almost 12 months at wikipedia, it's that the higher traffic an article is, the more you have to proceed with caution -- and God is one of the highest traffic and most contested (and therefore unstable) articles on the entire wikipedia. (It would make Adam & Eve look like a piece of cake!) Almost every tiny change of even one or two words there gets challenged by somebody, because just about everyone there has very strong feelings, look at the whole history of mankind, well nothing has changed there lately! If you go in and try to overhaul the article overnight without warning, it would likely create a HUGE uproar, as things like this often do whenever someone does that... if on the other hand you make your proposals on the talk page beforehand, (as is considered the polite custom), and see what editors think about them there first, and if there is truly a consensus for some of them, and I'm sure you wouldn't mind if more of them also wanted to have a say in its implementation, as no doubt they would... that's just my advice... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 00:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


I'm not sure. Might be Nirvana. BTW: the US warned the Indonesians about a possible terrorist attack on Sunday. Take care of yourself! &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 00:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


Splendid work on Caravaggio! --Wetman 06:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


Where are you writing from? How's the trip going? I'll look at the article (although I sense sarcasm on your part ;) &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 12:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Glad to hear the trip is goinmg well. No money to send.  ;) This James Van Praagh character seems to be a charlatan of the first degree -- not only is he engaged in non-science, but the rest of the nutters engaged in the same non-scientific piffle think he's a fraud. Pretty impressive! &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 13:08, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm reading "Who Wrote the Bible?" by Richard Elliot Friedman, and I wish I had had it whilst we were arguing with Codex Maximus. From page 51 (this is in regard to Codex' idiotic assertion that we were reading corrupt xlations in 12 different languages of the Hebrew):

Genesis 1 v Gen 2

man & woman



Wow, seems like we might have been right. Imagine that!

Also, I'll be typing up Friedman's xlation and account of the flood story as two diff stories. Pretty cool stuff. &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149;


Hi, you expressed an interest in Stuckism when the Stuckism in Australia article started (and was almost scuppered). If you haven't seen them yet, there's been work on more articles. Some great additions in the Australian field - now Godfrey Blow paintings up, and a new Regan Tamanui article. I've also done a lot of work creating Stuckist demonstrations, and launched Art manifesto amongst other things. Feedback welcome on these.

Best Tyrenius 12:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Harold Bloom[edit]

Leopold? Leopold Bloom is the hapless character in Ulysses. What would Freud think of such a slip?  ;) Thanks for the link, looks good to me, but I can see people bitching an whining. Hows the vacatyion? (They had bad storms in Cambodia and Myanmar today (yesterday?), land-slides, flooding, arks, oh, no arks...) &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 20:07, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Acculturation to Wikipedia[edit]

By the way, P., what advantage do you find in the near-anonymity provided by Wikipedians' login names? I am coming from an academic orientation, and Wikipedia culture is strikingly different. Lawrencemykytiuk 20:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Anybody home? Lawrencemykytiuk 21:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, PiCo, for your reply on my talk page. Lawrencemykytiuk 16:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


I didn't know Donald Friend was a CFD trader. Did he use technical or fundamental analysis? :-) Seriously though, contract for difference looks like it's already got more than I know. For Oz the only interesting thing I'm aware of is that some services make a "synthetic" market but others stick orders directly into the ASX SEATS system (the latter probably being better). -- Kevin Ryde 00:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Maugham pic[edit]

Hi, Can't really track back any more either, but I am sure it was delted because Lynes died in '55 and his pictures will not enter public domain till 2025. Let's plan on restoring the image at that time. Cheers, Haiduc 12:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Islamic View of Adam[edit]

I completely agree. CID!!! (Consider it done!) I made the adjustments. Cheers. --How's my editing so far? Call 1-800-2GOOD4U! 12:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


A mediation case has been started regarding the controversy surrounding the sexuality of Caravaggio. Your comments on the subject would be much appreciated! Lauren 13:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

edit blocking?[edit]

I'm sorry to say, I have no idea what is going on with your edit status. One if the things about the mediation cabal is that it is informal. Go to the mediation cabal page and read about it. The case there has nothing to do with your edit blocking. Now, that being said, someone may have gone through different channels to somehow get you blocked, though it is highly unusual that you can't edit individual sections. I'm not a sysop, so I can't see what kind of blocks have been put on you. Try contacting a sysop and see what's going on. One sysop that has helped me a few times is Martin. Try going to his talk page and asking him that question. As for the cabal case, I still need to do a little research to decide how best to get this article to be NPOV. Lauren 13:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Noah's Ark up for auction[edit]

Pico, I thought you might enjoy some of the comments on this auction in New Zealand. There are some funny questions and answers. rossnixon 10:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

the historical couples[edit]

Hi Pico! There's some guy, who wants to delete the whole article, I thought you may want to join the discussion. Fulcher 22:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I am sending this out to wikiart folks everywhere,[edit]

so please don't feel picked on. Here's my thing. I've been watching list of sculptors recently and have been weeding out the entries in red on the theory that this is an index of sculptors in wikipedia. However i have been reluctant to remove artists that I know or discover to be real, wikipedia worthy people, so am trying to decide if i should just do a stub - maybe a lot of stubs - of these folks or leave them on the list [I HATE lists with too much red - check out the List of Frank Lloyd Wright works for example.

For example, i checked out one, François-Joseph Duret (1804 - 1865) and discovered that there are at least two sculptors with that name, (1732 - 1816) and (1804 - 1865)- this one is the son - and both probably could comfortably be in wikipedia. I did have a rather bad moment recently when someone DELETED my article on Connor Barrett about an hour [maybe less] after I first posted it, on the theory that he was not wikiworthy [or something] and a lot of these fairly remote (in time and place from me) artists are a lot more obscure than Barrett. So, i would like to know that i have the support of the wikipedia art history community before doing this. Drop me a line, if you wish to sit down and be counted. Life is good, Carptrash 05:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. although i do mostly American art i have contributed to lots on non-American articles including Aleijadinho, Ásmundur Sveinsson, Einar Jonsson, Gunnfrídur Jónsdóttir, Henry Moore, Ivan Meštrović, Ørnulf Bast, Rayner Hoff, and probably some others. I say this because most of the stubs I'm proposing would be Europeans.

yes, i'll not stub someone if i can't the basics, so, thanks for your support and hopefully i'll never need it. Carptrash 05:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Contributions to Academy of St. Luke[edit]

I also wish to start by applauding your work on Caravaggio. As you can imagine I am an admirer of both (yours and his). I partially agree with Robb's disclaimer on the impartiality of the Academy, yet I didn't want to make it sound like the exponent of one great catholic conspiracy to abrogate artistic expression. As usual, things turn out to be more complex over the many decades. CARAVAGGISTI 13:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

historical Jesus[edit]

Thank you for showing up and helping out. How would you feel about getting rid of the whole "cross-shape" debate while you're at it? Let me just warn you that you might face some opposition on this page, as I have. If you do a lot of work on the page without going through the Talk page, a lot of your work might get reverted. Jonathan Tweet 05:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It also wouldn't bother me if you felt like nosing around Christianity. Jonathan Tweet 20:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

W.Somerset Maugham[edit]

Given your previous or current interest in Somerset Maugham - can you please add any thoughts you might have at Talk:W. Somerset Maugham#What next? Peer Review? so that we can move the article up a notch? VirtualSteve 09:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of William Albright[edit]

PiCo's deletion of William Albright is necessary if you are going to start a section on the patriarchal period. All other contemporary archaeologists (except those of the Albright school) reject the patriarchal period as legendary and unhistoric. It was for this reason I added the link. It is for this reason I am restating it.

John D. Croft 11:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Τά βιβλία και 'ή έρωτος[edit]

Sounds like a winner to me. Do you have an outline yet? &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 12:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


Did you read the article? Look at the sources? I did not invent this stuff. I wrote the initial text, but most of the edits were by Indian co-editors. I left others to polish it and to get the right "spin". You claim that the Indian co-editors do not understand their own religion? The Indian writers of the Indian sources do not know their own religion? These might be true, but I would have to be convinced of it. Do you know that there are textbook controversies in Hinduism which are not that different from creationism controversies in the US? Do you know there are sects of Hinduism which have published anti-evolution books? Do you know there are sects which have co-opted the notion of evolution for their own purposes and endowed it with their own meaning? I have not even looked at the article myself for weeks, so it might be a shambles now. I will give it some more time before I go back to it. --Filll 13:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

You're dealing with this guy too? He certainly gets around. &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 14:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi PiCo![edit]

It was messy and it was bugging me but I'm going to have to keep my "original research" out of the painting section. Pity, that!

Well, I'm glad you're happy, because when I sail into a major article people are not always happy.... "Like who do you think you are, changing around St Mary's Cathedral?!" (even if it was crap)

As you've probably noticed, I did a little rearrangement of the first section, left all the same info but ordered it to read better. Thanks for the encouragement.

What I need to do now is write enough about his painting to overshadow his sexuality, real and imagined. I'm glad no one has installed the drawing of the penis on legs.... not a nice one for the little kiddies doing school projects...(even if it is hilarious...!) --Amandajm 10:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


Yeah! I don't have a grand plan. I always/usually try to work with what's there. I'm just doing biography. One could add a million biographical details but I don't think it's useful.

I rewrote the ghastly article on Fra Angelico and it seems to be holding together. Just rewrote Sistine Chapel ceiling. Also did [[Sistine Chapel - restoration of frescoes, which I have to edit really telling photos for. But my computers running slow.

I have a collaboration with Attilios over Italian churches- He translates or writes them and I tidy up the English expression. Also Brosi who is a new-comer- really good on the architectural history- just collaborated on Renaissance architecture. He has access to all the latest books, while I no llonger have access to a convenient university library and rely on myy own books... can't afford the Sistine Chapel Book- it's $2,079.00 Aussi dollari, would you believe? I'm not sure how it translates into Euro but it's about 700 British Pounds and out of print!

Ok! I'm just about to drop Leonardo and Verrocchio into place! I don't actually recall a time when this article ever dealt with paintings, but I haven't been around long! Michelangelo is also a battleground. Check out the saga of Michelangelo and the POOF. It's really quite extreme, and I stupidly bought into it.

--Amandajm 12:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Too lyrical?[edit]

Give it the chop, then! --Amandajm 02:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't be too rude about Calabria! we live in an area of major Calabrian migration. Calabrian culture is so significant here that we have a number of imported customs, including the "Blessing of the Fishing Fleet" on New Year's Day. And I can assure you that Calabrians make bloody good cooks.... I took my youngest son, who is still a kid, to Florence a few years back and was very pleased by his attempts to order at restaurants etc, but the Fiorentinos looked at him and went "OMG, the child has a Calabrian accent!" --Amandajm 03:15, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Genesis -- The Nephilim -- God sets mankind's lifespan at 120 years[edit]

I probably should have given more explanation about my change to "The Nephilim." Although many believe that "...his days shall be an hundred and twenty years" (KJV) in Genesis 6:3 refers to the lifespan of individual people, there are others who believe that this verse refers to God speaking 120 years before the flood, thus warning of the flood instead of a reduced lifespan. They would argue that there is no mention of anyone in Genesis living to less than 120 years until a long while after the flood. Because of this difference, and because that opinion didn't seem to have much to do with the Nephilim, I deleted it. If you think this is important to mention, maybe there could be a better wording, such as, "According to popular opinion, God sets man's lifespan at 120 years." Sorry for any misunderstanding.

--Ijkopl 20:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Bnei Menashe[edit]

Hi PiCo. YOu may be interested in my additions to the discussion on this topic.

Regards, Myer Samra 13:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Myer Samra


Hi PiCo. Please could you refer to Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence with regards to your removal of the [citation needed] tags. The sentences are permitted to be removed unless sources can be provided, and I would like the give the editor that added them an opportunity to cite their sources before they are removed. Many thanks. --Rebroad 11:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo da Vinci[edit]

Hi. I notice you've been an editor of wikipedia for a while now, so I am quite surprised that you recently added comments to the main page of an article asking for clarification, when you should know these type of comments belong in the article's talk page instead. Rather than undoing your edit, I have commented out your comments so that they are still visible in the code, and have replaced you request for factual confirmation with a [citation needed] tag. shown here. Please let me know if you have any queries regarding this, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia so far. Cheers, --Rebroad 11:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Re Leo[edit]

Hi PiCo!

I'm sorry, but I removed your edits to Leo's bio and I gotta explain...

  • The article is so long that every time you edit it, you gget a automatically generated warning, and a suggestion that it needs splitting.
  • That means that there is no room for any repetition, speculation, philosophising etc.

Specifically :

  1. Leonardo's parents, names, and illegitimacy had been dealt with in the intro.
  2. His apprenticeship was dealt with in the next paragraph.
  3. We don't bother to write a list of things we don't know, unless we no nothing and we're fudging it.
  4. The matter about illegitimacy being acceptable is not necessarily true. It is the probable reason that he didn't have a University education. Bologna and Padova both existed. (I can't remember when Firenze was founded). Rich men took care of their bastards, bbut they didn't necessarily have as much status as legitimate children, unless you were very rich indeed.
  • About leaving visible remarks- it's a real No!No!. I've been caned for all this sort of stuff myself!
  • Problem with uncited material- if you write anything that obviously needs backing up, and you can't cite a source, then some mean person or other comes along and writes [citation needed] behind your statement. But that is not all! Oh! No! Immediately this horrible banner goes up on the bottom of your article labelling it as an article that has unsourced information. Horror! This is something that is to be avoided at all costs if you have a vested interest in the article.

So what do you do? You leave a message on the discussion page requiring that someone who knows Caterina's name puts it in the right place.

  • Pictures. Each pic has a source file. it says:-

Image(:)Leonardo drawing river valley.jpg

If you add any words to that file name, then it can no longer be found and you have an empty little box with red writing! NOTHING can be added between the word Image and the .JPG

  • Last thing: the stuff about Leonardo and the Johannite Theory exists. That's the problem. Regardless of whether it's trash, it constitutes information. So we dump it all on some other page called by some ghastly name- Leonardo da Vinci in popular culture . There ya! I got it right in only two goes... That is the place wher you dump the bullshit, and the smut goes on Leonardo da Vinci, personal relationships. I can't remember what it's called.

Anyway, the short version is, please don't make the article any longer, unless you have info that is a) vital, b) sourced.

Sorry to be such a horrible dragon. I've just deleted a whole lot of pics someone put up as well, because they all have their own page. Please come over to the Leonardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor page and fill out the stubs on his inventions!

--Amandajm 13:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


Hi. You removed the portion of the definition for the word Bible that included various secular and vernacular usages of the word. It is standard practice in wiki that when a term is used by pop culture for so many different things to link to a disambiguation page for those definitions. After the first two defintions (the most used) there needs to be something to account for all the popular usages and meanings. I'd appreciate if you took a look at other pages to verify this (for instance, the artice big) and undo your edit. :) I'd prefer for you to re edit yourself if you agree. Thanks! -- 23:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


Pico, thanks for working with me on improving the David article, and for being so understanding and patient. I appreciate it, and also I would like to apologise for any edits I may have made based on my ignorance, such as this one. All the best, --Rebroad 15:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


Substance well put on Talk page there, Pico. You might, however, consider editing out typos there with added signature stamp (as I did in Section 19, bottom, there). Otherwise someone might get the wrong impression. I haven't checked your revisions in the article, but you might consider doing so & correcting typos, if any, with the same Edit summary. --Thomasmeeks 12:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the encouragement, PiCo! I haven't looked at it for a few days, because i have been suffering jetlag and feeling rather awful! I have to do the rounds of a few articles that get vvandalised every time our back is turned.

--Amandajm 05:23, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi PiCo! Leonardo da Vinci as a cultural icon. Way to go! See message at Leonardo discussion page. --Amandajm 23:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


Hello, I am not really sure about the origin of the name Sinbad. I’ll try to find out later, because I am a bit busy these days :(. In fact, there is a real island in Basra called Jazirat As-sindibad and this is already mentioned in the article. Arabs usually call Sinbad Sindibad or As-sindibad or As-sindibad al-Bahri السندباد البحري (Bahri came from Bahr in Arabic 'sea' بحر ).I think the story came from Arabic folklore especially Basra and southern Iraqi folklore because people of Basra are well-known in Iraq as sailors and they have trading relations with India, so they could have brought the name from Sindi language or some thing related to this language. Also I’ll try to search later to find whether the tale was mentioned in original Arabic manuscript which contains about 300 tales from the 13th century. Also I should mention that other names like Aladdin and Ali ‘baba’ are real Arabic names and are used in modern days as common male names, where as Sindibad is not used as a modern male name. best regards --Aziz1005 09:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The name Sindibad could be related to sind which is a language or area in modern day Pakistan; usually cities there are called 'something' Abaad such as Islamabad, Hyderabad etc. This could be related to the topic somehow. --Aziz1005 20:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Aziz ,if you break word Islamabad(Islam=Islam Abad=Live .Place of ISlam to live) and Hyderabad(Hyder=Name of Scholar in Sindh abad=Live.Place where Hyder Lived(or named after him).Khalidkhoso 23:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Sinbad's name[edit]

Hello Dear Saw your edit on user page User:Aziz1005,just wanted to correct you for some thing zindabad, meaning victory - it would be appropriate, as the hero is always victorious.if you break word Zinda-bad(Zinda=alive Bad=after it means Alive after Death). Not necessary it is used for Heroes ,it is also used for countries slogan, as Pakistan Zindabad,Sindh Zindabad.Khalidkhoso 23:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Some times it means "Victory or Victorious" but real meaning is different then what it is.I am Glad that you my point.PiCo Zindabad :}(this will help you understand it more).Khalidkhoso 12:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award[edit]

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

TomasBat (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 21:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Len the nosepicker[edit]

Yeah! I'm back ... I could do with a bit of Beethoven's 5th, it's triumph of the soul, rather than all that mute endurance... no, it's grumbling mumbling endurance actually. I'm not at all good at the mute stuff. Well, I asked a young person with AS why it was that he had stopped picking his nose and he informed me that it was because his head needed scratching. Incessantly. Still... it's better than head-banging. People really need to get onto Wiki and make all those wasted obsessions and compulsions really useful. Which hand did Len pick his nose with, that's what we really need to know. Can we possibly find snotty fingerprints on the pages of his journal along with the smears of vegan pesto (minus the Romano cheese) and slops of vino. Or was he a teatotaller? There is another question of great importance to tha pages of Wikipedia, even more significant than gender, vegetarianism and left-handedness.... Did our Len have Aspergers Syndrome? If not, why not? That's the burning question. After all, it's positively fashionable nowadays.

--Amandajm 07:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Yoo Hoo, PiCo! where are you?[edit]

About Little Lenny and his Fan Club....

Are you gunna write the stuff tying up those quotes into a nice picture of Len's ongoing (or waxing and waning) popularity, or what? I wish you would.

I've just redone the parag about Florence and his contemporaries, expanding the implications and influences. I think it's better.

I've also renamed that blinking article about "personal relationships" to Leonardo da Vinci's personal life in order that it mmight include those details that Leophiles are desperate to know about... vegetarianism etc. "Did he like chicken?" That seems to be the big question, though variously interpreted.

Meanwhile, I'm under pressure to "do something for poor Verrocchio!"


--Amandajm 02:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Noah's Ark[edit]

Hi! I've left a comment on Talk:Noah's Ark. Best, --Shirahadasha 04:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your comment. Trying to stay neutral here. Best, --Shirahadasha 02:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Jerusalem FAC[edit]

The featured article candidate discussion of Jerusalem (archived here) has been restarted. Please check if the current version of the article has addressed your concerns, if any, and voice your opinion on the FAC at the current nomination. nadav 19:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Len the naughty boy[edit]

Go it, PiCo! Such a small gem it added not a single byte! But what impact! You can follow me around adding and removing commas any day.... well, on the other hand.... some people, use an absolute, superfluity, of them. I came across an article, yesterday, with so many of them, that I just sighed, and, went somewhere else. --Amandajm 14:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

No, Forget I said that....[edit]

PiCo, ... why are you chasing nitpicking little commas when you could be writing the Historiography of Lenny?... why haven't you done it yet?... I want to know. ... so why dont you just get your index finger out of your nostril and do it..... NOTE:This is referred to in some circles as bullying Maybe I'll find that Brosi... he's better at that sort of stuff than I am.....

--Amandajm 05:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh poop!...You really expect me to do it then!... Well,....that all sounds drastic. I'm glad you've got access to a computer! ...

What we need is someone with access to a University library. I'm gunna drop a note to Brosi. I'm to old and lazy to go chhasing things up.

If you would like to write, there's another outlet. Try Simple English Wikipedia

It's great fun writing for it, if you can keep the vocab to about 12 yr old level. A lot of the writing there is hopelessly bad because people dump wikipedia article there and try to simplify them, instead of writing from scratch. They are often horribly convoluted ot miss the point entirely. The article on Birds,[7] for example, described the fact that some birds have a sort of penis and others don't and what they do if they don't, (if you follow), but didn't mention that chicks hatch out of eggs or that birds build nests. The article on cattle said that they were usually black and white! One thing, don't get too bogged down in trying to stick to Thingummy's 800 word system ... You're smart... devise your own! The rules are much more relaxed because finding simple modes of expression is more important than rigidly maintaining wiki format. If more people were to work at it and expand it, it would provide a terrific service.

You could go and check my article on the National Gallery, London.

--Amandajm 05:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you expecting me to be serious?[edit]

Art in Australia...yeah... nah.... I haven't looked! I'm scared to look. I don't do Art in Australia. I do Gothic revival architecture and stuff like that! I've had reeeally baaad experiences with art, in Australia. (don't ignore the comma...). I don't feel like sticking my neck out ever again!... well, maybe I could take a look and if it's bad enough I could tidy it up. My library doesn't run to Australia. It does things like Romanesque Gothic Renaissance with a leaning towards Early Renaissance painters, English Cathedrals. I don't even own a book on Lloyd Rees let alone... what's the name of that mad wonderful joyful intoxicating artist I'm trying to think of? I can do Norman Lindsay and possibly Bill Dobell but that's about it. Am I prepared to drag home stuff from the library? Well, probably no, because I'm hopeless at remembering to take things back. The last fine was $800... which was appromimately 100x what the book had cost in 1972! --Amandajm 05:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Giotto again[edit]

"apenage" was left over from Attilios. He doesn't always know what words are in common usage in English and what are not. He actually tries hard to avoid terms that are not common. I think pension is fine. It's actually more like "the King's gift". I've rejigged those two passages to make what I am saying absolutely clear. The reference to the reported ugliness of Giotto's children is in support of the fact that he was himself an ugly man. The refernce to his wit comes from Vasari and is once of the almost-certain things that we know about him. It shouldn't have bee deleted. I have referenced it to Vasari.

One of the things that worries me about Whatsiface's opinion that they are the "bones of some fat butcher" is, why on earth would some fat butcher (or any butcher, fat or otherwise) have such a high level of arsenic and lead in his bones? Sounds sinister to me! --Amandajm 06:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


loooks great... not enough inline referencing... other than that, I'm not going to touch it. Attilios keeps urging me to do "poor Verrocchio" so I must! There is another seriously major article that I am gearing up for- Gothic architecture. I'm also writing a series on Victorian stained glass studios which I am neglecting. Gotta do Heaton, Butler annd Baynes, Whoosi, Whatsi and Frankinface and Yeah, them too. --Amandajm 06:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


Little Giotto has somehow ended up with a sentence about basilisks, horses in the stable, dogs in the manger, artistic commissariats, and cuckoos in the nest with lots of commas but nofullstopcapitalletternewlines. It's tooooo looong, even for meee it's too long. You gotta fix it! I found it when I was removing a little "on" that was misplaced/left behind .... I'm leaving it to yo --Amandajm 13:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

know wot?...I think I'll just drop over to the Aspergers website and see what we are nailing down this week, and then I'll do the Sydney Anglicans page and check the latest on diocesan politics and then take a look at James the first and see if they've solved the little gender problem and take a look at Edward the Black Prince whose mother might (read was) have been described as brown all over with a broad flat nose and black eyes but her little Eddie couldn't (read NOT POSSIBLY) have been coloured whatever the archbishop of Southwell said.... Then there's Lenny annd whether he liked chicken...what an entertaining place this is! --Amandajm 13:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmph! Haven't got any Red. I've got spinach and mushrooms. I'm gunna hafta make happy with spinach and mushrooms--Amandajm 08:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The butcher of Piazza della Santissima[edit]

I'm sure it's Giotto. And I saw the pic in Santa Croce back in 1981. I had a good article about the bones bookmarked but it's disappeared. Why don't they ever show you the things you really want to see? I was watching a program the other day about study of skulls and everytimme they put up the diagram that was the clue to what they were on about, some graphic wanker would spin it or zoom it or do some blinking special effect that was so frustrating when what you want is info, not blinking sensationalism!

I'm just working on something in a hurry, before dinner (which I have to cook of course... thank God for sausages)

Seeya! --Amandajm 07:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Art of Australia[edit]

Yes, it does need some work.... It could do with a bit of ordinary sorting out and making headings for a start. Yeah, it really doesn't do credit to Australian Art does it? I spose I might!

meanwhile, go over to the Simple English Wikipedia site. You don't need books. You can write about almost anything that you know about, off the top of your head and almost guarantee it will be an improvement on what's there already. It's quite a good place to try out ideas, actually. (I cooked a large zucchini instead of the spinach and for some reason it tasted revolting...must be the drought...the sausages were delicious...) --Amandajm 11:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


"quasi-abandoned"? "Apollonian and Dionysian"? I hope you've linked it to all Haiduc's pedetastic sights! Pity we can't have some pics..... we could, you know, because you can download to Wikipedia, and call it "Fair use". It's gotta be "fair" to have ONE pic by a painter.... to illustrate the subject in question... oh no not that blinking subject again! Well, at least there's no question about Friend's little friends....

So he ended up "quasi-abandoned", did he? sad! --Amandajm 14:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

so I gotta ask.. why PiCo? any reference to Larry the Magnifico's little friend Pico Mandorla? --Amandajm 14:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Next question... are you a he or a she or is that the wrong question? --Amandajm 14:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry! I don't know whether I waxed lyrical enough! Yeah! It was great! Yeah it was poetic even! Yeah! I loved it! OK.... Yeah, it needs a rating, but first it needs inline references to support the Dionysian bit because you can't make comments like that unless it's a direct quote. You are not allowed to write poetically on wiki! The only person who gets away with it is that boring old fart Rossetti for Britannica 1911 which/who is/was quoted in every single Early Renaissance article, with all his particular prjudices (He didn't really like "primitives" very much and couldn't stand fra Angelico...) Gawd! that's how I feel...quasi-abandoned! I'd like to feel truly abandoned in a Dionysian sort of way, but no! ...quasi-abandoned! That's what I am! Oh woe! I think I'll go and find that bottle of Drambuie.--Amandajm 15:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

well, it's a good article, whether you did the quasi-abandoned thing or not. Warialda sounds like quasi-abandonment. You knew French personally then? I'm glad to know you are a journo in Asia. No access to books sounds desparate, particularly for a person whose tagline reads like a sky diving disaster. Many regular web-writers are restricted for one reason or another, including physical or mental disabilty. One doesn't like to pry. I also grew up wishing I'd been born somewhere else. There are things I love about Australia. But, one of my great loves is Medieval Architecture... and here I am in Sydney. I am also an Anglican.... and here I am in Sydney, wishing I was almost anywhere else! Anglicanism in Sydney is something else. But because of the breadth and scope of the Anglican Communion, it can tolerate and even accommodate a boil on its bum like Sydney.

I looked at a page on how to archive, and there was this ghastly list of pros and cons! I'm going to have to read it all in detail, when I'm not feeling tired... had a glass of cask red with my lunch... not exciting, but good for the blood. What part of Asia are you in? Is it dangerous? --Amandajm 03:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

in memoriam[edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is presented in memoriam for the best turn of phrase on Wikipedia: "the number of known animals had expanded beyond biblical proportions", from Noah's Ark. May it emerge from the edit history once again someday, when the waters of middling prose recede.--ragesoss 08:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


Sinbad: Hey thanks for your message. I'll take a look at it, but quite frankly I'm tired of wikipedia, especially the related info for the 1001 Nights, which seems to be politicized for some reason surrounding Iranian ("Persian") users who always manipulate the pages for their own political purposes. Many of my articles have been either deleted or changed beyond comprehension which makes me tired and bored of putting stuff on wikipedia. I think I'm gonna make my own website with my data that nobody can change! Oh well, I'll take a look too. Thanks. stan goldsmith 19:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

"The correct transliteration is Qur'an"[edit]

You're right, I should have said a better transliteration would be... Granted english to arabic tranliteration, is not exact. However, while k and q may not have different sound in english, they're useful to distinguish kaaf, from qaaf and yes the u indicates a Damma. And yes again, while the glottal stop is never indicated in english, a ' is about the best we have.

All that aside, qur'an is a direct link to the article rather than a redirect.ornis 13:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hiram I[edit]

There's no need to sound defensive, I'm simply trying to clarify the question of Hiram I's proveable existence for my own reasdons. There are no large libraries near me - I live in Phnom Penh, Cambodia - and I don't have access to JSTOR, and this is why I'm asking you for the information. The only piece of information linked to Vance in the article is the statement that he was suceeded by Baal-Eser I and Ittobaal - if the Vance footnote is meant to cover more than that it doesn't indicate the fact clearly. I personally have doubts about accepting Josephus - he's saying in effect that the Tyrian archives from the 10th century had survived into the ist, a thousand years of seige and fire, which is frankly unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely. But the 10th century sarcophagus is more solid (pardon the little joke): how erliable is the dating, or did someone simply decide it must be from the 10th century because it mentions Hiram? I repeat, I'm simply asking for information, since you seem very knowledgeable on tbhis. PiCo 04:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
This is a very difficult place because you do not seem to understand a number of things. You mentioned "the large body of evidence that Solomon's kingdom never existed". There is never evidence of a negative. There cannot only be evidence of existence, or lack of evidence. Numerous historians have questioned the extent of the Hebraic state in the BCE 900s, but I have seen nothing to suggest that it wasn't ruled by a man named Soloman, or some name similar to that. There is plenty of evidence of trade through the middle east in that post Assyrian empire time. The written evidence from Phoenician sources indicates that the various city-states in the area were vying for dominance. Just one example is the fact that Hiram I actually ruled quite a bit of coastline, but that he was succeeded by different kings in Byblos and Tyre. Now kings in that time/place are not as we often think of kings such as the King of France in the middle ages. Many of them were priest/kings and controlled little more than a city and some surrounding villages. You said "if the Vance footnote is meant to cover more than that it doesn't indicate the fact clearly." The footnote was not meant to cover more than the single statement. However, reading the whole article would give you the sense of how secure some of the conclusions are. Okay, now the dating of the sarcophagus is not based on something as concrete as radio-carbon dating. It is based upon the style of carving, and the content of the inscriptions. That content is then linked with the content from other inscriptions to generate among other things, a king list. It is not perfect, but it does provide a way to organize material. The sarcophagus was unearthed, I believe, about 1970, and the archaeological context suggested that it had been buried for much of that time. The "temple" where it was found had been independently dated to the 9th - 10th Century BCE, prior to unearthing the sarcophagus. About Josephus, he is generally considered a reliable source only about what he actually witnessed. Thus, that he read the two historian's accounts and that they said X is considered reliable, but the truth of X is not, absent other confirmation. The whole thing is a large Chinese puzzle, various parts support each other; if one can find, for example, radio-carbon evidence that supports a particular date for, say, the burning of a temple, and that matches an historical account of the temple being burned, then that helps support the complex. Vice versa, if a written account can be "proved" to be a later insertion in a document (such as the mention of Christ in Josephus), then whatever support that insertion provided is removed. The totality is not static, but the overall picture only changes and comes into focus (or goes out of focus) slowly. I am not sure exactly what you want, but it doesn't sound like Wikipedia. Hiram I is as real as any historical personage can be 3000 years later. --Bejnar 06:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


(like Finnigan only different) St. Paul (I don't often quote him) said that he was all things to all men. OK! Len, has to be all things to all... yeah, that was Paul, OK... people want him to be an architect, an alchemist, a Mormon (or perhaps I mean a Mason), a leech-doctor, a vegetarian (don't forget the vegetarian whatever you do), a kick boxer, a trepanner, a flight-control-officer, a-Knight-of-the-Round-Table, the Great-Grand-Son-of-Jesus and the Seventh incantation of Dr Who, a Boy Scout, the Lover of Lucrezia Borgia (, wrong woman...) maybbe ... well, someoneorotherslover any way! There's bound to be something I've left out! Oh, yes! That as well! So if they really have to have him as a sculptor, Personally, Dahling, i don't give a damn! --Amandajm 15:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

DH is a fringe hypothesis[edit]

In critical circles the Documentary hypothesis is, for all practical purposes, obsolete. It has all but been replaced by Form Criticism and other offshoots. --Java7837 18:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC) [1]

Sorry, when I noticed that you delete the opponents of the hypothesis section i thought you were doing it for pov pushing --Java7837 00:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

YooHoo, Pico![edit]

Are you there? I haven't read my emails lately. You know how you archived Len the Lefthanded? Do you reckon you could archive Mad Maddy's page the same way? I looked at the info you sent me and got simply terrified! --Amandajm 06:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, PiCo!

Much obliged! Seeya!--Amandajm 09:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, poop![edit]

here we go again.....

Southpaw Lenny[edit]

I just gotta ask this...How come you call adding 223 bytes to an intro "tightening up"? I have been "rather protective" of the Architecture article, which is (apparently) in for a massive overhaul. In the meantime it has had some very poor editting. I can't afford to get too excited about it, as I didn't write it, merely tidied it up. So, out of a sense of self-preservation (or some such bullshit) removed it from from my watch list. Maybe my mate Duncan Dooley would like to keep an eye on it. He's not involved with wikipedia yet. He tends to write things about knickers, knackers and knockers.

Back to Romanesque architecture! --Amandajm 06:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Just look! don't get involved, whatever you do!
I know I've said this before, but if you want a bit of fun, that you can do without a library, try editting Simple Wikipedia. It's a challenge to write well in really basic English. Almost everything there is badly written. I do it as a relief from more serious stuff. --Amandajm 07:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi PiCo!--Amandajm 07:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
What's gmail? You still in the land of OZ?--Amandajm 07:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

See Wendy Richardson --Amandajm 07:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Pip, we can't turn this into a chat page. do you want me to get onto hotmail? ajam
So, where did you get to then? aj

Hi PiCo![edit]

Are you there or wot? I've just done Romanesque architecture. Believe me, you don't need to know anything about architecture.... just spelling and grammar! I've been over it all twice and I'm sure I've left typos behind. --Amandajm 17:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Hi PiCo, thanks for your message. It is good to see your improvements to the article. Cheers. Maias 07:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi PiCo![edit]

Please don't chop the intro to pieces.

  1. What is R. Architecture? Itt is.....
  2. Where did term originate?......

What it is, and who came up with the term are not the same thing. Not in art history.

  1. Castles. They built them
  2. Churches. they built more of them....

But you need to say that they built castles. Please don't do it. I'm a very clear writer.

--Amandajm 11:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

You wait, little Peeky-poo! wunnadeesdays he gunnacummagen! Oh GloryHalleelewyahBrudder! Den you stop your scoffin!

Actually, I'm gunna ask an angel to pay you a visit. When it walks in the door, nearly as tall as Micky-baby's David and half as beeyootiful again, you'll just freak out, and the angel will say, "See, she told ya so!" --Amandajm 11:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'd love to tell you a story! A couple of stories... but I'm busy on that article. Johnbod has found me lovely pictures and I'm trying to write the, I think it's what you call copy.... Hey, check out Cathedral.... You can rewrite the whole thing so that it scintills all the way to heaven.... --Amandajm 13:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC) --Amandajm 13:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Biblical accuracy[edit]

As far as I can tell, they're all inaccurate -- we'll find out what the Bible really says when we meet Him face to face. Hence, linking to a site with lots of translations gives you a chance to find the least inaccurate one. :-)--SarekOfVulcan 12:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

i accidentally stumbled here, if there's a bible question, i might be able to help out. JaakobouChalk Talk 00:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

how the Deuteronomists say it[edit]

By combining the tetragramaton, which we read instead as "Adonai" (lit. Lord) Elohainu (following custom, out of defference I put a K where an h should be) which is "El" (or God) +suffix for "our" Slrubenstein | Talk 16:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

re: Abraham - I would leave such speculation to the experts. If you are really curious about this, see what the commentary in the Anchor Bible Genesis (by Speiser) has to say. However - not being an expert myself - let me observe that Biblical etimologies - like folk etimologies around the world - do not follow the methods of professional linguists and often require in the listener a certain sense of imagination. Like puns and much poetic imagery (which the Bible is full of - see books by Robert Alter, or Kermode's Literary Guide to the Bible), these etimologies sometimes create associations in the readers mind. Slrubenstein | Talk 16:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

From EJ (2007)- In Genesis 17:5 "the father of a multitude [of nations]" (Hamon Goyim-Ham considered a shortened version of Hamon-Wolf) is a popular etymology, although it might possibly conceal an obsolete Hebrew cognate of Arabic ruhâm, "numerous." More likely, Abraham is a mere dialectic variant of Abram, representing the insertion of h in weak verbal stems, a phenomenon known from Aramaic and elsewhere.

Apparently you were "mechaven" (i.e. you independantly discovered the same idea) to the EJ. Good work.Wolf2191 17:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


Precisely for the reason I live in Wales I find it boring creating article on my own country. I have a massive interest in Eastern culture - Tibet, Cambodia and Thailand in particular. See also Tum Teav and Cambodian Red Cross and Cambodian clothing, History of exploration in Tibet, Shalu Monastery and Yak racing. Quite frankly my own country bores me. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


Where are you? Are you there? We've been all flued out and tooo sick to write. --Amandajm 06:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

It's been sunny, cold and windy. Cold enough to make my hands seize up. What happened to your dinner party? Every time I think about someone I would really like to invite, then. I think maybe I would like to have them all to myself. What might be fun would be to have invite all those inventors- James Watt, George and Robert Stephenson, Brunel, Benz, the Wright Bros, Bell, Eddison, Marconi, Wedgwood.... would those boys drink Chardonnay do you think? --Amandajm 11:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Documentary Hypothesis[edit]

Hi PiCo,

I've had a read through the DH article and I think it's far, far better than it was when I came looking a month or two ago. Great work! I share your concern that the 'After Wellhausen' section is a little too person oriented, but it's difficult to imagine how it could be otherwise. The course I'm currently assumes something else again — in apart from Deuteronomy my lecturer talks exclusively of 'P' and 'Non-P' sources (which may be as intractable here as it is in mathematics!). She is more concerned with looking at the content, though, and this seems to be the direction Old Testament studies is taking — I think the various permutations of the DH have taken us as far as they can, and anything new doesn't really alter our interpretation of the passages in question much.

So whilst there may be useful information lacking, I think the most important job you did was to strip (very diplomatically, I might add!) the criticisms, most of which seemed to be either fringe theories or deserving of their own pages. I wonder if links need to be made to those other theories, or is that just inviting trouble?

CammoBlammo 11:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you think I should add the following to the MA page? Umberto Cassuto- an oral tradition and a number of ancient poetic epics, which were subsequently woven into the unitary and artistic texts of the Pentateuch and other biblical books (he places the redaction at the time of the judges which is incorrect but the main theory still stands). (Do you have any idea if this theory is still looked at as viable today?)Wolf2191 17:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


I misunderstood Cassuto to be saying that the main Bible was written by Moses with several later additions based on oral tradition. There does seem to be a school of thought (Breuer mentions them) that sees the main body of the Bible as being written by Moses with various later additions by the Prophets. I will try to pin down a definite name (I think Tamar Ross is the modern proponent of such a theory).

I also posted a comment on your Abraham theory above. BestWolf2191 02:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I intend to edit Wellhausens anti-semitic motives in formulating his theory as well.Wolf2191 02:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info and the links. SL once sent me this on Wellhausen's motives :

"Here is what Wellhausen wanted to prove: that Christianity is the most "evolved" religion. to prove this it was not enough for him to claim that Christianity was "more" evolved than Judaism, because like other Christians he saw Judaism as the antecedent to Christianity (not just that, but that Protestant Christianity is more evolved than Catholic Christianity!). So he wanted to prove that Judaism (1) was itself evolving and (2) evolving in one direction and (3) evolving in a direction the logical end result of which would be Christianity. As an example of this evolution, he claimed that at one time Jews (well, you know what I mean, B'nai Yisrael) sacrificed to God at different places; at a later stage in their evolution, they sacrificed at only one place (the logical conclusion: after the crucificxion of Jesus, there will no longer be any need for further sacrifice; the progression is many to one to zero). Wellhausen identified four sources (JEDP) and argued that these were (1) written at different times and (2) if you put them in the correct order (the order inwhich they they written) you see the general evolution of religion that inevitably leads to the New Testament and Christianity. Crucially, he considers the J source the most "primitive" and the Priestly (P) source - the one centered on sacrifice in one place - the most evolved. The crux of Wellhausen's agenda was that Judaism evolved in a specific direct and that the specific direction can be found within the Torah; therefore, evidence within the Torah proves that Christianity is what God wanted all along. This was Wellhausen's agenda."

It may not be anti-semitic as much as pro-protestant but my source (NEJ) used ant-semitism so I stuck with that.

If you find out anymore on those Levites with Egyptain names, Please notify me. It's a most intriguing point. BestWolf2191 16:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


Kudos to you for removing the pro-Ron Wyatt image from the Durupınar page. TuckerResearch 02:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Your POV insertions[edit]

Hi PiCo: Your recent edits, as in the Torah article reflect only one POV. You cannot come in with "guns blazing" and assert that only the views of modern "biblical scholars" know what the Torah and its related literature is all about. Please tread very carefully before making such changes in the future and be aware that Judaism has its own 3,500 (that's three thousand five hundred) years tradition/s as to how these matters are studied and taught. Wikipedia presents that as much as it does your POV insertions. Thank you. IZAK 10:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Documentary Hypothesis[edit]

PiCo, I posted the point about archaeology on the documentary hypothesis over disputes about the dating of the various sources. For instance the "Court History" which many saw as a factual reporting of the age of David and Solomon is now (on the basis of the almost non-existence of Jerusalem at that age) thought to be a document, produced at the earliest during the reign of Hezekiah (if not later). The list of sites mentioned in various sources only existed in the 7th and 6th centuries BCE. It was to these approaches that I was referring. I obviously did not make myself clear. I view Albright and Bright as long departed.... Regards. John D. Croft 13:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

If I can comment... What about the King David artifact from the 9th century BC? [8] rossnixon 02:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Age of the Earth[edit]

I'm going to tweak the lead in response to your comment. See the talk page for my response. Thanks. - RoyBoy 800 15:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Baruch Halpern[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Baruch Halpern, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baruch Halpern. Thank you. Lilac Soul (talk contribs count) - Review me! 07:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)