User talk:Sagaciousphil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia Rollbacker.svg
FPCs needing feedback
view · edit
Strauss, Richard - Ariadne auf Naxos - Restoration.jpg Ariadne auf Naxos

This page is protected by Highlanders



Apparently, the painting is called Première rêverie in French. Or, at least, in this biography and the French list of his works they call it that. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

It would be so much easier if they would stick to just one name ... Would it be worth including a few lines about Bougereau as 'Background' to help the article look a bit better? I was just flicking through some of the articles on his other paintings and this turns out to be a copy paste from the one and only ref used! As it's only a few sentences, I'm just going to try to fix it. SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:14, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Ah! That would be too easy. We sinners (well, I the sinner) must repent. Yes, that would be good. What was Bouguereau doing at the time? Hmm... gotta find a decent source. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:18, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Got a decent article up. To get much more we'd need his catalogue raisonne, and I am not spending $400 on a book I'll use once. Of course, if you've got access to this, that would be great. I can't preview it from here. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Amazon is letting me see some pages on its 'Look inside' feature - but, of course, not the ones I need! Kicks chair and curses SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Curse them! Oh well, at least we've got a good enough article to nom now. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:11, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, it looks much better now. I'll try to see if I can trick Amazon into letting me see the pages I need tomorrow SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:32, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Have you ever tried proxying into the US servers for GBooks and Amazon? I do it from time to time. - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

American feminists v British females?[edit]

In fact, as I am a British female (yes, I know all the "vocal American feminists" will no doubt spit, hiss and create the usual drama at this: "British" and "female" appear to equate to "non entity" and/or "idiot" or of "no importance", "not worthy of any consideration" as far as the vociferous, vocal few are concerned.)[1] [The edit summary is along the same lines.]

Any diffs actually showing that any American women Wikipedia editors have actually said or implied these things? Lightbreather (talk) 18:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you go looking for them yourself Lightbreather; or better still, drop this unnecessary fishing expedition and get on with improving the encyclopaedia. CassiantoTalk 19:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement[edit]

By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:
  1. The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
  2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
  3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Mention on Arbitration Enforcement case[edit]

I wanted to let you know I mentioned you on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Evidence in this edit and I may mention you again in future edits. This is just a courtesy to inform you that you were mentioned. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case[edit]

You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)