This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Don't know if you tried to contact me, earlier. I turned off the ringer to my phone at some point when a fax machine wouldn't stop trying to talk to me. I don't know, but I think it was off all night last night and day today. I was thinking it was quiet. Geogre 20:53, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Shocking truth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Facebook It's the Wikipedia face book: pictures of Wikipedians. The only good thing about being me is not having to see me. Can't imagine wanting to share. I look like just some guy. It's with writing that I distinguish myself at all. Geogre 21:11, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Possibly disappearance of Dr. Johnson
I have to pay off the phone co. If I disappear for a short time, that's why (temp. interruption in service). Shouldn't be for long. -G.
Cornelis
Well, my red pencil and I visited the page. See what you think. There were a few rephrasings, but generally I was omitting commas used before coordinating conjunctions that didn't have independent clauses after them, and I wiki linked some things that are usually a bit dumb (like years) and a proper noun. Feel free to revert anything that isn't right. Geogre 18:17, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Voting
We try to be very open on most things, but certain things we restrict to veterans. There are indeed some votes for which you need to be here for three months before participating, but these tend to be
votes on major community management issues
not stuff most newcomers would be interested in anyway.
The first example that comes to mind is the Arbitration committee election that's starting soon. There are two reasons we close these votes to newcomers. First, we don't want people to create a bunch of new accounts just to vote. Second, newer users won't usually know the community well enough to understand all the issues involved in these votes, or know the people involved. Hope that helps. Isomorphic 23:28, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Sure. Thank you. I wasn't asking in a critical spirit, just wondering if/when I'd be eligible to vote on certain nominations that I've been reading about. A three-month rule seems reasonable, in fact "we don't want people to create a bunch of new accounts just to vote" was exactly what I meant by suggesting that it might be a precaution against coups. Only you put it more cogently.:-) Bishonen 15:51, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Luckless
How did you e-mail Lucky? I think losing him would be too great a loss over one article vote. I'll be on the IRC, despite my own desires and inner voices, probably around 1300 Eastern. Geogre 13:45, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Leaving
I think it is all very sad. He's a great contributor and I will definitely miss him. Mike H 21:37, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)
QV
Viz. my talk page's latest. I'm blushing. I'm also thinking it over. Geogre 01:40, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
One more time.
Hi. I've decided to give this insanity one more shot and to contribute in other ways other than VfD. I can't thank you and the others enough for your love and support. - Lucky 6.9 22:35, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
You [wink] toffee-nosed git! The nerve of you, dropping a note to giggle at my heart-wrenching confession of how i let Barnes & Noble play upon my credulous simplicity, and make a laughingstock of my innermost feelings!
I don't know how i'm going to get over this ... but perhaps either "The Silk Chinchilla", or "A Boy's New-Year's in Waleston, Montana". Hmmm.
But a little more seriously, i hoped to flesh out a little the abstract image of how it is that so much crap gets published, that is not worthy of a $100 advance, let alone a $100K one or a WP article. Glad you (also?) enjoyed it. [smile] --Jerzy(t) 20:46, 2004 Aug 10 (UTC)
Please take no offense
At my reply to your comment on the high school teacher and expert on "C changes." The one that stung more was the comment about our being ogrish to the Manga kid. I thought we were voting right on. While it is possible to write an article on the manga, as it came to us it was a review, and reviews are out. I don't think we were being mean, although in cleaning it you are being nice. As for making fun of the Engrish...well, sometimes it's funny. You know that I always realize that a person making those mistakes still knows one more language than I do. Geogre 01:19, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Must Must Must Increase My Jul
Just a joke. Turns out there is a Julmust article. That's something. (Notable because I know about it, of course, from going to Ikea.) Geogre 13:21, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Do people still drink that stuff? Sorry, I meant to say, julmust is a must. Big cultural icon. I trust Ikea changed the name of the product at Easter while keeping the liquid the same, in the approved fashion. The Julmust article may itself be notable in that Larry Sanger edited it, although it was a bland little edit and, I think, no improvement. -- 31 support votes and counting. :-) Bishonen 21:42, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Yet another "Wanted" poster for Stombs
Hey, Stombs, just in case you drop by these parts, could you please leave a message on this page, so I can talk to you? I really hope you don't let all the VfD listings put you off editing, and I feel kind of bad about that BJAODN crack. (Even though actually making it to BJAODN would be quite an honor - they're very selective these days. :-)) Bishonen 22:16, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Quite OK
Hi there Bishonen—thank you for your kind message. Please don't feel bad: I wasn't put off as I knew I was bound to make some mistakes while I got used to the style here. When you pointed out the error I really could see the point and how dumb I was! Anyway, I am glad it's all sorted; and I thought the crack you made was really funny! (BTW if you're curious on how I wound up typing Swedish things, I was following links while surfing and different stuff came to mind. But as you may have guessed, I am in New Zealand and moving ahead with putting in stuff about my country.) Hope to have more fun here—I enjoy sharing what I know and researching for this project. Stombs 13:16, Aug 15, 2004 (UTC)
Cool! I'm replying on your page. Bishonen 16:54, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks again, Bishonen. It looks like I need to sift through a bit more of what's marketing hype and what's not—down here, we only hear so much about Sweden (through places like the Scandinavian Business Association, which was how I started getting to the Swedish links). Thank you for explaining the context of the Swedish prankster comment but also thanks for your kind comments on my other edits. I hope I do more good than harm here, even if I have created a few VfDs for you! (I shifted this down the bottom BTW. :)) Stombs 23:14, Aug 15, 2004 (UTC)
I think that most of the people's criticisms on WP:RFA were not fair and unjustified but your comment made me realize that I care far more about reading and doing research and editing the contents than doing household chores. There is so much that I still have to write and correct. Andries 18:29, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
What is this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%E5ng_till_Sk%E5ne is a new page. Don't know if someone's going to nuke it, but I doubt they will, since it's a VfD matter or a transwiki, but what is it? Geogre 13:57, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Never heard of the song, never heard of Nils Hansson, and I have Scania, or Skåne, roots and am quite into these things. "The unofficial national (!) anthem"? Give me a break. I've just learned that Nils Hansson was a very, very, very minor poet, younger brother of poet Ola Hansson (Ola's notable). The poem/song is a typical late nineteenth-century patriotic effort in praise of Scania, very harmless in itself, nothing inflammatory there. Describing it as a "national" anthem is either a slip of the keyboard or a political statement, I'm guessing the latter. See, Scania, the southernmost tip of Sweden, has a "patriotic" secessionist movement in the form of marginal political parties on the extreme right. Marginal and marginalized - even though Scania politicians are generally noted for conservatism, all other parties shun these guys. You know what's interesting? That the user has posted Scania and this song on the List of national anthems today. I'd say that makes it a political statement. Hey, do you have the means for checking what IP users post through (I mean, when they're not posting anonymously?) I'm thinking of a guy. I'll just e-mail you the username. Bishonen 15:32, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hmm. In this case, it seems like a VfD listing is in order, with a note. It's probably not a Wikisource issue, because the work is too minor, and the user is trying to score a political point. As for the second question, I don't. That takes a developer. Hypothetically, I can ask a developer, but I'd need a fairly strong reason. Geogre 16:58, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Oh, right. No, I don't have strong reason at all. No, no, not Wikisource. It's not only stunningly minor, it's in Swedish. I'll check Nils Hansson's publication credentials on LIBRIS and Project Runeberg if you like. That's easy.Bishonen 17:05, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I got nothing, except a claim in a Skåne magazine from 1955 that "Vackra hembygd, du som vilar" is, uh, generally thought of as the, hmm, "regional anthem". This 1955 article goes on to enumerate several other contenders for the honor, though. Swedish Google for phrases from the song gives no hits. Nor does international Google, btw (isn't that odd, if it's in a Wikipedia article?). Bishonen 18:12, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
That last isn't surprising. Google takes a while to find and crawl our pages. This one was a brand new page that I was nipping. I note that people are suggesting Wikisource for it. Also, you'll notice that Rossami took care of cleaning up the National Anthems table. I'm glad he did. I've been on a writing tear just lately, mostly out of frustration with Life not happening. Geogre 19:34, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Abbreviations
I notice that Zoney is moving & breaking out the abbreviations. Seems like there's action there. That ought to make it easier in the future to edit. Geogre 01:37, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
VfD notice time paradox
I edited the Shayne Sweeney section to add my VfD notice. When you saved your entry, whether you edited the entire page or just the Shayne Sweeney section, you naturally created a new section for Biblical studies below the current Shayne Sweeney section but separate from the Shayne Sweeney request. Then I saved my proposed deletion, and it naturally created a new section for Indo-European Alphabet within the current Shayne Sweeney but now a separate section which of course was placed just before your Biblical studies request which had just appeared. All quite reasonable and no harm to anyone. Jallan 00:55, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Anti-sockpuppetry vote
Well, I did get around to adding a vote eventually. And don't worry about bothering me again, the worst thing that can happen is that it takes even longer time ;) Fredrik | talk 09:09, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Howdy
All ok? E-mailed you a couple of times. Geogre 16:33, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Sure (you can see my footsteps around the place, if you look). I'm just slow, sorry. Got a message for you about ready. Bishonen 16:49, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Listen, about the Scanian stuff. That was no keep decision. That was an "I don't want to jump into that briar patch" decision. Can't blame him. Geogre 22:31, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Scania
Thank you for the encouragment! I guess I kind'a needed that after the snio/Cnilsson last comment... But they did succeed in one respect - I won't go into such arguments again, since I just realized the truth in that old saying about "den som har språket har makten" or however it went. My english simply isn't good enough to fight them with. I'll keep at sv: (användare:Mike) from now on...
Ha det bra!
\Mikez 11:01, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Cornelis Vreeswijk portrait
I also wasn't aware of Jimbo's recent announcement regarding limited-use material. I've always strived to contribute only original work to Wikipedia, so I know there will be no license problems. Photos of celebrities seem to nearly always be copyrighted; we've gotten away with fair use on most of those for quite some time, and I've been thinking about the potential for original portraits as replacements for these for almost as long. I've no idea what general reaction to them might be; it is likely to seem a little strange to have sketches or other portraits of the most-photographed celebrities of our time, though I suppose the more often someone is photographed, the greater our chances of finding a public-domain photo of them (Britney Spears, for example, a U.S. government photo). But I digress; a good place to discuss it might be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Illustration, though there are likely to be other copyright/fair use discussions around somewhere that would apply, under Wikipedia:Copyrights or Wikipedia:Image use policy.
To your second question, I'm afraid I am fairly inexperienced in portrait illustration; 3D models, diagrams, technical illustrations, sure! I think the last photo-to-portrait I did was back in high school (10 years ago, wow), but I could probably pull it off, unless a better candidate volunteers for the job. I'll start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Illustration. -- Wapcaplet 15:30, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Peter Weibel
Could you look in again at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Peter Weibel? I've reversed my earlier vote & think you might want to take a look at what I've found. -- Jmabel 23:38, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)
VfD
So the reason you didn't tag it is because you didn't know how. Fair enough, and nothing to get offended over. Questions and comments on VfD take on a rather curt tone. It's a consequence of seeing so much junk pass through, and not (usually) actively intended. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:22, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Limited permission: image copyright problem
I would really, really like to add a photo to Cornelis Vreeswijk (Swedish singer-songwriter, deceased in 1987), but I know there isn't a hope in hell of getting one under GFDL. It just might be possible to get more limited permission, though. I have talked with the Swedish Cornelis Vreeswijk Society, whose website has a few nice pics, and it turns out they have the photographers' permission for free, but only for their own use — the copyright is retained by the photographer. I think it might be worth contacting one or two of these photographers and asking for the same kind of permission for Wikipedia. They're professionals, they live by selling the rights to their images, and Cornelis Vreeswijk portraits are in limited supply (Cornelis being more famous and popular now than in his lifetime), so forget GFDL. But since they weren't averse to having their work shown for free by the Cornelis Vreeswijk Society, why not Wikipedia, too? That's what I think, but I have two questions:
1. Is this kind of limited permission any use to Wikipedia? I could have sworn I'd seen a reluctant admission in some policy document that occasionally this was the best we could do and in such a case it was acceptable to use images with those conditions attached. But I can't find it again.
2. If it is any use, how should I ask the copyright holders? (Boilerplate request for permission, anyone?) I've been trying to formulate a request in my head, but the harder I try, the more it sounds like something shady. ;-( (I should preferably ask in Swedish, too, which always makes any request sound a little shadier. But if I had a template to work with, I could deal with translation issues.)--Bishonen 14:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
1. Limited permission is definitely second best. Ask the photographer for GFDL if possible.
Thanks for replying, but my problem is that it's not possible. Or, well, it's possible to ask, but I think it's impolitic to lead with a request that's bound to be refused. It's not that I don't realize that GFDL is totally the recommended option, infinitely preferrable, etc. I do realize it. Also, I only see the familiar boilerplate requests for permission under GDFL at the link you give (am I missing something?). Sounds as if the answer is no to both, then. I've been roaming Wikipedia for weeks looking for a solution to this, but, well, I guess the reason I couldn't find it is that it doesn't exist. :-( Thanks for trying, Gdr.--Bishonen 15:41, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't think it will hurt to ask for GFDL even if you think it likely that you won't get it. If refused, you can ask for a more limited license. Gdr 15:50, 2004 Aug 24 (UTC)
Sorry to throw cold water on the idea, but because Wikipedia is committed to providing open content, we can't accept images if our only basis for using them is a non-free license such as this. Jimbo Wales has stated that images restricted to noncommercial use only, or with permission specific to Wikipedia only, are not allowed.
I think what you're referring to with "a reluctant admission in some policy document that occasionally this was the best we could do" is our policy on fair use images. See Wikipedia:Fair use. Currently we do allow images if we can make a good case for fair use and have little prospect of obtaining a truly free substitute.
So the answer is, if you believe the image can be justified as fair use, it may be acceptable. Fair use is not based on permission, but of course it would still be useful to obtain whatever permission you can from the copyright holder, even though with fair use you are claiming permission is not needed. --Michael Snow 16:33, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Right. I understand the concept of fair use, and, no, that wasn't what I was talking about. It was something different, that would have fitted this case ... well, I must have dreamt it, or else it was obsolete. I certainly couldn't in good faith claim fair use, since there aren't any PD photos of Vreeswijk out there. I'll forget the whole thing, then, and not trouble those copyright holders. I do understand that we need a transparent policy, rather than a jungle of exceptions, and thank you both for your prompt replies. Bishonen 18:57, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I've often wondered, in cases such as this, where all of the available photography of a subject is unlikely to be GFDL-compatible, if it would be helpful for some talented sketch-artist Wikipedians to produce an "artist's rendering" of a subject based on one or more photographs. Such a sketch would certainly constitute original work, and could then be licensed as GFDL or public domain. -- Wapcaplet 01:19, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
how about asking for permission to use a low res thumb? that way they get to advertise their wares and still have the prospect of a sale? Erich 02:27, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bishonen. I've moved this here as it was time to clean the village pump. Angela. 13:38, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the cool cat
No problem! Not only the neatest title, but a pretty cool office, too. I think we need something like that in the States! -Seth Mahoney 16:53, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)
Vandals of Sandviken
Hi, David, I don't know if you're watching those anon Sandviken kids' talk pages, so this is just to let you know that I've left a message for both 81.227.148.223 (talk) and 164.4.31.79 (talk). Best regards, Bishonen 13:42, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I bet you're right that a ban would do little good...I just hope they'll listen to reason. I'm considering calling them up by phone. They've made it pretty obvious who they are, and it wasn't a problem to find likely suspects in the white pages. Perhaps a talk in real life would make them understand... David Remahl 16:58, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Oh, hey, guys, yes, that is great. Remember I meant it about you being welcome to contribute. Bishonen 18:05, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Actually, they figured out I knew Swedish by themselves. I didn't get a chance to call them. So it was all your doing :-). David Remahl 19:12, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
:-) I bet they regretted giving us all that fine free Swedish info in Robin Karlsson. Mind you, I knew before then that they were posting from a school, it was obvious. Didn't know which school, though. Btw, I have a nephew by marriage named Niklas Modigh, but he's only seven, so I soon stopped suspecting him. ;-) Bishonen 19:35, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments, and thank you for catching that problem. I'm doing my best write now to expand on his history and work with the SDS in the hopes that people will accept it. Unfortunately, I only joined a week or so before we found this article, so I'm pretty sure my objections are going to be ignored. Would you consider voting on it once I get that history section expanded?
Your vote will count less because of your being a new user, but not necessarily your comments, Che. I'm sure voters will be interested in those, especially ... well, I hope you'll take it in the spirit that it's meant if I tell you that you made kind of a bad start by telling Terrapin and Geogre they stink. (Well, technically, you told them their comments stink. ;-)) If you wanted to apologize for that, it might make people listen better still, but it's up to you entirely — I'm not trying to tell you what to do. Redstar2000 is interesting, but I'm not sure about the notability. I will keep an eye on how you develop it, and wish you luck. Bishonen 23:34, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Woops, I didn't even remember that. Yeah, like I said I'm new here. What I meant was that they all came on talking about "proletarian vanity" and debating his marxism, which has nothing to do with the article. I will however go and make some appologies--Che y Marijuana 23:38, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)
Sidney
Ok, the VfD debate for that article has long rolled off. The article was deleted before the VfD templates were in use. It turns out that it was deleted not for vanity, as Anthony claims, but for copyright violations. Indeed, the new article contained copyright violations, too, in that it lifted huge quotes. Those are being removed. The figure is terrifically minor, but it may well be that it would be kept. Since the deletion was for copyvio, if the text of the current one is not copyvio, it is not appropriate for a speedy. It's not a great article, though. Also, you couldn't have seen the VfD decision -- it's gone -- or the dispensation, since that was only in the deletion log, which is available only to administrators. Geogre 15:22, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Well, the people who are watching A. are all over, and I'm letting them know about this case. It took a ton of work to find anything on this particular article because of how long ago it was. Thing is, if the deletion vote has rolled off, but we know it was deleted, I think it can be speedy deleted. The question is whether the user RK is the one who recreated it. A. has come back trying to rally every discontented person, even though none of them are discontented the same way, for an assault, and that is a danger. You've seen the mess I'm in on VfD. Again, it's a kind of "We'll fix them" thing. A. can sometimes say a valid thing. Fine. Then, though, he decides that no one else has anything to say and starts acting upon it. That's not valid. That's vandalism or trolling. Geogre 18:11, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
You should note that Morgenbesser died August 1 and the article was created August 5. It wasn't some grand conspiracy. Someone recognized that the famous professor deserved an article, probably after hearing of his death. anthony(see warning) 12:04, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, Anthony, but of course I noticed the timing of the article creation, especially since the external links were mainly to recent brief obituaries. A grand conspiracy theory literally never occurred to me — I always assumed that the death and the obits were the reason Gzornenplatz created the article in the first place. Bishonen 12:19, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
You're not the one with the conspiracy theory, then. I was referring to: "The question is whether the user RK is the one who recreated it." anthony(see warning) 12:24, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Oh, right. I didn't see that you were talking to Geogre on my page, but now that I read the whole context, I do see it. Better talk to him directly, if you want. Incidentally, I asked Geogre what "user RK" above stands for, but he missed replying (because we were mainly talking about unconnected things), and I still don't know what it refers to. Something to do with you, it seems ... don't get it, though. Bishonen 12:35, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I was talking to both of you. And what would be better is if you two wouldn't get together behind my back trying to get me in trouble. User RK most likely refers to User:RK. anthony(see warning) 12:51, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I don't see the point of the user RK, reference, then. It would be better if you didn't obsess about old stuff, too — see the date on the message you replied to? I got the copyvio issue wrong, I misread, and I apologized, all of it a while back, what more can I do? I'll also add that my opinion of you has gone up since then, Anthony (not that I suppose my opinion is anything that keeps you awake nights). I've come to appreciate that you say things because you mean them, and in my book that's not trolling. Bishonen 13:02, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I didn't expect this to become a long conversation. I just wanted to note a couple facts for anyone reading this page. If it were my talk page I'd just delete the whole thing, as it is old stuff which is already resolved. But some people don't like to do that. anthony(see warning) 13:27, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, and I've read your new article. Whilst appreciating that this is democracy at work, I still feel it is wrong to have an article devoted to a meaningless/misused phrase such as this. Personally, I would prefer a redirect - if we have to have anything at all. Deb 18:08, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
BTW, I changed my vote on it after your revision. I thought you did a good job of reporting on what people mean when they use the term, without endorsing it. Geogre 18:16, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
If you're awake now
You shouldn't be. You'd be better off reading that chapter in the morning. Thanks for the help with my unruly Talk page. BTW, danny is starting a Wikipedia book club. We read a novel every week and then make sure it has a good article. He wants to start with Pulitzer Prize winners that we don't cover. As he points out, we have pretty much every Hugo Award winner, but massive gaps in the Pulitzers. (Since this is American Lit., I'm a little nervous. I don't like American Lit. much.) Geogre 00:21, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
re: Reposted copyvio
Sorry if I gave the wrong impression when I chose not to reply to your earlier comments on my Talk page. There was no personal intent. As I said in another thread recently, I connect via dial-up and have to be fairly choosy about what I reply to or I'll be at it all night. I'll always answer a specific question though.
From your evidence, it sounds like you have a good case. That's evidence that would generally be well received on VfD and might even be strong enough to start a thread in Requests for Arbitration. I'd ask others for advice on that, though. I've never participated in an Arbitration process. You're right that it may just stir up emotions without really changing behaviors. The best answer may be a simple renomination. Trust that there are more of us who care and who follow the rules than there are who choose to break them. Rossami 01:52, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Well, I was referring to that bit at the top of the page, "Please include your opinon." I.e. just putting your name with "keep" or "delete" seems to me to be on par with being an IP voting. If you have no reasoning, you have negated one half of the duty, just as if you have no signature you have negated the other. Geogre 16:09, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Viktor speaks
David Remhal got a request to phone Viktor, subject of the vandalism, and he did. For follow up, see what he has to say (as user chmod007). It happened while he was on IRC when I was, so he mentioned it there. Geogre 16:12, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I did, yes. He left a note on my talk page and also sent me a mail. I'll ask if I can forward it to you. Basically, he is very concerned that the vandals will bring bad publicity for the school. Apparently they have some kind of IT agreement with Sandvik which could be threatened by such publicity. He's also uneasy about the fact that some of our good-faith discussions implicate him (Viktor) and his friends (for the main part, Niklas) as possible vandals.
He asked if it was possible to remove (edit out) the school and their names from the past discussions. I said that it was probably possible, but that I would have to consult everyone else involved first. I also informed him that even though it is edited out, it will still stay in the page histories. He agreed that wouldn't be a problem, considering that they're not spidered by Google and other search engines.
Furthermore, I told him about the related vandalism on sv, and he said he'd look into it. He claims that he has no knowledge of who really committed the vandalism. — David Remahl 16:54, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hi, David. Yes, indeed, the school and the individual students get to use Sandvik AB's net, and it was a very stupid thing the two students did who posted vandal edits and articles directly from it. Compare OlofE shaking his head pityingly over that particular aspect — uj uj uj — on Swedish wiki Bybrunnen (Headline: Pågående vandalisering?), after I had told them about the IP's and the info I had found on the school homepage. For latest events on sv, see also messages on the Bishonen Talk page from Niklas Modigh, Johan, Martin and Lamré (Swedish sysop).
I'm not really happy about our editing stuff out, except maybe my mention of the school on 3 September (see my message to Martin below). Anyway, I don't think they should be worrying very much about things like Google hits on our pages. They're in much hotter water with Swedish wiki, which is more likely to make trouble as far as the school and the deal with its sponsor goes. Bishonen 17:32, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Ok, I won't argue for it. I'm not that happy about removing information potentially useful for the future either. However, we must add the information that Viktor and Niklas and other people who were perhaps implicated as vandals were probably not involved. So that someone who googles their names does not misconstrue the situation and gives them more trouble. What do you think? — David Remahl 18:03, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Oh yes, absolutely. As I've pointed out a number of times, on sv. and en. both, this aspect has worried me the whole time: that some of the names may be those of victims rather than perpetrators. Do please do whatever you can to un-implicate anyone you have talked with and have faith in, David. However, you might care to take a look at the message from Niklas Modigh on Swedish Bishonen's Användardiskussion, before you decide he wasn't one of the writers. That message sounds pretty genuine to me. Does the real Niklas Modigh, by phone, claim it's a fake, by any chance? Not that I want to go on hounding even the perps, far from it. Bishonen 18:27, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Sandviken, Ockelbo, Härnösand, Gävle.....
Hej.
Jag har sett mitt namn figurera i diverse inlägg som handlar om vandalism. Jag kan villigt erkänna att jag skrivit ett fåtal inlägg som kan betraktas som vandalism. Det har jag dock slutat med och bett om ursäkt för. Jag tycker det är beklagligt att det inte kunde räcka med det. Vem som har fortsatt "vandalisera" wikipedia efter min ursäkt har jag ingen aning om. Jag tror knappast att det är någon av mina vänner. I fortsättningen ser jag helst att ni slutar nämna skolan och företaget som gemensam nämnare för de här "vandalerna", då jag inte tror att så är fallet. Jag ser då hellre att ni kontaktar "vandalerna" personligen så att de själva kan få stå till svars för sina egna handlingar. Vill någon prata med mig eller någon annan av eleverna på skolan hänvisar jag till David Remahls diskussionssida, där Viktor Johanson givit ut sitt mobil tel. nummer.
MVH
Martin (bor i Härnösand och Ockelbo)
Reply to Martin
Hi, Martin, are you talking about the Swedish or the English Wikipedia? Only one mention has been made of the school on en.wiki after those messages from you that I saw on my page and David's. (Incidentally, have you posted messages on any other pages than those? I'm only asking because you state above that you've apologized, which I can't say I've seen.) That single message was from me to David, telling him that I had raised the matter on sv.wiki, where it turned out they had had some interesting contributions — "Bluffpoker" comes to mind. I'm happy not to have seen any more articles in the Famous Unknown Swedes Series on en.wiki since 1 Sept. We very much regard the matter as closed, and would be more than happy to welcome you and your friends as legit contributors, if you're interested.
I've read your identical message and those from your friends on my Swedish userpage. Could you please tell the guys that I don't have time to respond on sv. (this whole thing is taking much too much time for me), but I'm quite prepared to believe you about "Fred flygare" being a copycat posting. Lamré and OlofE seem less convinced (see Lamré's message on the Swedish Bishonen Talk), and the Swedish side is really up to them, so it might be better for you to address them directly, or Bybrunnen.
I do agree with you that it's much better not to mention your school or its sponsor on en.wiki any more, thanks for pointing it out. I'm sorry I named them in my 3 Sept message to David, it was just thoughtless habit. Best regards, Bishonen 17:13, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Charlotte Lennox
I found a very cool link on Charlotte Lennox and The Female Quixote for you. Let me know, if you've seen it before. Geogre 00:44, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I have indeed. That was how I got started on writing her up myself. But thanks, Geogre. Bishonen 01:38, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thought of you
When I saw the new article on Flemingsberg; it mentions some places that are quite famous to me now. Geogre 19:01, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Support
Thank you very much for your support during my recent run for adminship. I appreciated it very much. If you would like to talk sometime, please drop me a note on my talk page or email me. Mike H 00:10, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
Poor nakee
I wondered if the new article about the kid who is very nice but wears his leather jacket all the time was related to our old articles, too.
I may try to give you a call. Vidalia, Georgia is an alright town, but this school is kind of creepy, at least as it was presented to me on the phone. Geogre 13:46, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Talked to the Ma, and she understands but is frustrated by this turn of events. We now have the relocation as an Official Family Goal, though. That's not bad. Geogre 15:16, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Not bad at all. I hope the family comes up with some useful alternatives. Bishonen 15:27, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks again!
I hoped beyond hope that we might have a stumbling block over which our Bandit might fall on his face. There's a new Bandit entry called Life Goes On about some long-dead ABC-TV series which, quite honestly, I don't even remember. As usual, it's nothing more than the air dates and it's been tagged as a substub. The original entry has the same license info at the bottom of the page. Whoever...or whatever...this is might be breaking US law via a US proxy. I can't find matches on Google, but this moron is getting these things from some sort of licensed source and the Wikipedia servers are trying to alert everyone to the fact. I'm at least going to pass the fact on to the discussion page and get the heck off this site. Thanks for your help! - Lucky 6.9 16:49, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Blended learning
It's a pretty meaningless, but unimportant, stub now, so I'll just let it slide. RickK 22:08, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
Sure. Glad to see you're still around, Rick. Bishonen 22:27, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Gareth Owen
Hello. He's on loan. So what? He's still a nobody, and once his short career in the pros is over, only trivia nuts (who can host their own fansite if they like) will even remember his name. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:04, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Was your user page vandalized?
There is a bit there flattering to myself. Something must be wrong. Geogre 13:32, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) (now with gmail)
Oh, I checked your contribs & saw your work on cleaning up the George Eliot talk page. What a disgrace that article was! Eek! Anyway, I added in stuff that was incontrovertible and stuff from my memory, but George Eliot deserves a ton more than is there. Geogre 13:53, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Must have been :-)
Plenty of new info there about me, too. I was just about to send you an e-mail to ask was it OK or had I better delete the bit about you, in case it could bring awkwardness or whatever. (Or delete it yourself any time, I won't be offended.) Apropos of too-short articles on golden writers like George Eliot, did you see RickK's listings of the looooong articles on Laura Ingalls Wilder and her daughter on Cleanup on the 13? Terrible. I've just gone shorten the daughter article by two thirds (by reverting — dead simple crash diet :-)). I'm sorry to do it, maybe the people who went to the trouble of adding all the material will be outraged, but seriously, it's an encyclopedia. The article is still much too long, of course. Bishonen 17:45, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I added some somewhat speculative stuff to that article (last par). I think it is true, but I can't think of anywhere I've seen it attested. My brain may have slipped, and it may, in fact, be a commonplace that I'm just "discovering" because memory is letting me claim credit for the work of others. Anyway, do you think the Glumdalclitch/Stella stuff is spurious/obvious/original research? Geogre 14:38, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Blocking
It doesn't do me any good to block ANYBODY. The instant I do, Guanaco unblocks them. RickK 04:48, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
And people wonder why I left for good. I just popped over to see how some of the finer users are doing and I read this. Rick, it's the former "Lucky 6.9." Drop me a howdy when you can on production@dc.rr.com. Thanks. Feel free to "whois" the address. It should come back from Time Warner/Road Runner in the Palm Springs area. - 67.52.108.20 20:06, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Correction...make that a Road Runner commercial account routing through Virginia. Should've run it myself first. - 67.52.108.20 20:09, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hi there, Lucky, hope you're thriving. No wiki abstinence, then? Bishonen 20:14, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hey, RickK, I sympathize. Lord knows something has to be done. Snowspinner's going off on a tear in one direction, others in other directions, and we're all in a mess. We all agree that RfC is broken, but no one agrees on how it's broken or how to fix it, and then, in the meantime, the over-zealous go flipping nuts with "you insulted me! you die now!" and others with "I'll unblock anybody." Sheesh. Oh, and Lucky, you should see my Managed Deletion proposal. It will make life a lot better for the substub fighters. It's in the sorta-kinda proposal state right now, but you can find a link to it from my user page. Sorry for butting in, bishonen. If'n it's a vandal, I suppose I could try a block. If'n it's a controversial user...I'm too chicken, probably. Geogre 21:18, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hey, guys, you're all more than welcome to chat on my page. I'm sad to see that your userpage is really deleted now, Ralph. :-( I know that's what you wanted, though. Bishonen 21:52, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Well, I don't get it. I don't see any rationale for Guanaco doing that. Why would he want wikipedia to be at the mercy of a hyperactive vandal? - because Guanaco is out to undo anything and everything I do. RickK 04:17, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
Flower and Whiteflower
Ok, I've added some of the background to the poem to the article now. It was in my eME book, turns out, so the background information the editors gave me was confined to language, for the most part. Nevertheless, it seems that an Oriental origin is probably out -- that was just one critic saying so, and Medievalist critics are some of the dumbest creatures on earth (because they're scholars). I don't know the French development of the tale, but the thing is 100% French until Boccaccio picks it up again. Geogre 18:10, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The stuart
Yeah, I've got to admit - sometimes the whole categorization thing confuses me, and I've been working with it for a while. I'm sure it will all get straightened out. -Seth Mahoney 21:53, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
-Hey
I got on a roll with making that category. The only way to change it would be to go to each one of those pages and change the s in stories to a lower case. I don't think its worth it though. Sorry to have messed up your page you wrote though.--The_stuart 04:53, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I changed the cats again, this time removing Category:Short stories and adding Category:Short story writers - this is what you were getting at, right? Have you been paying much attention to the various category discussions (not meant to be rude - read on)? I was wondering if there had been any talk about adding See also sections to categories. -Seth Mahoney 21:57, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
Category:Long story
Wow! He was really busy! Yeah, I can fix it. It looks like he created a new category and moved a bunch of articles to it. I'm not sure from your note if this is what you mean, but if in the future you want to change a category, all you have to do is go to the article in question (or in this case, the many articles in question) and find the category you don't want (in this case, Category:Short Stories) and change it to the one you want (in this case, Category:Short stories). It looks like The stuart did this for every article currently in Category:Short Stories. Poor guy, that's a lot of work to just have someone revert. -Seth Mahoney 20:20, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, Seth. Yes, that was exactly what I meant. Are you saying that by changing the category in the article itself (in the many articles themselves), I'd be changing the category? That never occurred to me. I kept looking for some kind of platonic ideal category, in some kind of central repository of categories. (I just don't think like a programmer.) Bishonen 20:47, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Yup, changing the category in an article changes the categories it is listed in. If you create a new category, though, it will show up as red until you go in and assign the new category to other categories, which is where the describing gets a little messy. Anyhow, Category:Short Stories has been fixed and is now listed on Categories for Deletion. It turns out to have been for the best, too. There was a little recategorizing and alphabetizing that needed to be done, so the category looks a little nicer now. -Seth Mahoney 21:01, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
Still more thanks
Hi, Bish! Thanks for the nice welcome-home on my talk page. Yes, I'm doing the more pleasant tasks already. I just did a stub about Amboy Crater, an extinct cinder cone out in the middle of the Mojave Desert. It's quite a sight. Pass my best wishes to Geogre and please stay in touch. - Lucky 6.9 21:44, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Allende
I can take care of wikisource. But, it ought to be deleted from wikipedia anyway (as non-encylopedic). From reading your link, I'm not clear on whether there exists a non-copyvio English translation. If so, I'd rather replace the wikisource rather than delete. Or, I wonder if some kind Spanish speaker involved in the Allende page would re-translate it — it's not long.
Or, is the claim that the speech itself (rather than translation) is copyright and so automatically a problem? That seems unlikely to me, as he was speaking in his official capacity as President.
Thanks for pointing this out. Wolfman 00:07, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I removed the vfd.
Here is daniel chernilo's web site. It contains both the disputed text and an audio recording of the speech. We could ask him for permission to use his translation -- though it clearly needs some work. Or, we could ask if some Spanish speaker on the Allende page would be willing to quickly re-translate the speech for wikisource. I'm very skeptical that there are copyvio problems with the speech itself, but I do understand your concerns about a translation or transcription.
Posting this on the Allende page also, in case anyone there is interested.Wolfman 01:06, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Sorry, Wolfman, I think you must have missed what I wrote about Mr. Chernilo here: I've already written to him and asked all sorts of things, and he's replied and told me he's not the translator, and doesn't know who is. It's kind of a subtext in his message that he downloaded the two texts plus the audio file from somewhere on the web himself, deciding to assume they were Public Domain, as academics do (I'm a prof myself). He doesn't mind us using anything we like from his site, but it's obvious that permission for it isn't his to give. I'll send you his full e-mail message, if you like, after I ask him if it's OK (because he's got copyright in that all right ;-)).--Bishonen 07:10, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Wikification
David, you're stalking me! No, I appreciate the date wikifications, actually, at least in the sense that I know they must be, while I don't like to do them myself, because I hate the policy that dictates them. On the other hand, I agree that such things should be uniform, so thanks for fixing them. Bishonen 22:43, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I agree that the policy could be better...It seems like the main reason for linking dates, is for the software to be able to identify and localize them more easily. However, many articles are overwhelmed by lots and lots of links to years, to the point that it becomes difficult to find the "real" relevant links. There are some other issues with the policy too, that I brought up on Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers).
The good thing about the fact that the software now easily can identify dates, is that it will be relatively simple to migrate to another date link policy in the future, in a highly-automated fashion.
Oh, and sorry for the stalking. That's the price you pay, once you get on my watchlist :-P. — David Remahl 22:54, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Allende
You don't gain copyright over a public figure's public speech by printing it! Translating is another matter. -- Jmabel 00:26, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
That's true. Also, I gave Jmabel a link to the audio recording; so the point is moot anyway. Thanks for the feedback on the old translation copyvio; this one should be clean. Wolfman 01:32, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
What's this?
If no one speedies it, I don't know what Horza is. I think it's undeniable VfD, but the question is whether or not it's a speedy delete candidate. Geogre 13:23, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hot Topics
I didn't see where you were referring to. It's interesting, though, that the discussion on MD has finally taken off on its own, without its all being bouncing back and forth me. I'm glad to see that. What's more, it looks like general consensus, except for "what to do with recreated" articles. I agree with 13, for what it's worth. Bad time for me to fall ill again, since today I need to write up a voting page, final version of the thingie, etc. Ugh. Hardly sitting up. (Oh, btw, I have figured out how to use my new printer. I made a finished print of one of my Photoshop things, and it's gorgeous. This could spur another spate of learning Photoshop.) Geogre 13:49, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Re: my probable Wikibreak. It's not just the pearls before swine, it's just the weariness with how overburdened it all is. The weight of the project is going to crush it, and the weight is going to make all change impossible, unless it's top-down. My experiences are illustrative in that. Thing is, though, it's just wearying, and I'm already tired. Geogre 01:24, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Montague Summers List
My dear Bishonen:
Thanks for italicizing the list of book titles on my Montague Summers article. I put a note on the talk page there about why I reverted a couple of your alterations them. I had put them in link form to remind me to go back and look up people such as Wycherly's first name but as I've got a million articles--or so it seems--that I check up on, this one slipped by. So thank you for that.
You know, if you love italicizing book titles, there's two more long lists on other of my articles, Lowell Thomas and Ely Jacques Kahn, Jr., that could use some aldine TLC. ;-) Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 15:53, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
Alas, Not My Field At All
Actually, the Montague Summers piece is about the only contribution I've made to the Restoration-era articles. I've read a number of books about the period, but if anything I'm more into 18th century England, say Dr. Johnson or Boswell but I can't help but to love Charles II. (Who doesn't?) I was interested in Summers because when I got into Buffy the Vampire Slayer I was interested in what had been written about vampires and it didn't take long until I came across this guy. (It just occurred to me: do you suppose Joss Whedon named Buffy Summers after the rev'd?) I love the juxtapositition of the rev'd being an expert on the occult and something like Aphra Behn. Right now, I've been doing articles on Dawson's Creek. I suppose the diverse field I'm working on--see my user page--is comparable to the disparate subjects of Summers. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 17:56, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
Actually, just a note on the Buffy thing. I don't know about the last name, but there was a movie first. "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" was a "Valley Girl" type of comedy, and it's actually quite funny. I quote it sometimes: Paul Reubens plays the vampire henchman in it, and he says of Buffy's boyfriend, "Kill it a lot." I love that line. Sorry for snooping. Came here for something else. Geogre 01:22, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Oh, and Bishonen, had you heard the thing about Aphra Behn being a Rosicrucian? I heard a paper delivered on the subject, and the paper was virtually incomprehensible. Its author was speaking as if her Rosicrucianism was well known ancient scandal, but, well, it was impossible to prove. It's like proving that someone used Freemason symbolism. Since you can't know what the Freemason symbols are, how do you know they were used? Geogre 01:26, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Latin for the Illiterati
I don't have my reference books at hand so I'll get back to you on this. The Latin pun I like best is in the Vulgate, from Matthew: Et tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ecclesiam meum aedificabo.
PedanticallySpeaking 19:50, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
My dear Bishonen,
Interesting research project I had from your article Lucus a non lucendo. My Cassell's suggested your translation was correct but I didn't find the phrase in either of Jon Stone's books Latin for the Illiterati or More Latin for . . . I did find it in my trusty Brewer's Companion, however. The 15th edition (p. 655) says "An etymological contradiction. The Latin phrase was formerly used by philologists who explained words by deriving them from their opposites. It means literally 'a grove (so called) from not producing light,' from lucus, 'grove', and lucere, 'to shine,' 'to be light.' It was the Roman grammarian Honoratus Maurus (fl. late 4th century AD) who provided this famous etymology . . . " Honoratus I had trouble tracking down because, like so many Romans, he can be listed in several ways. I did learn from my New Catholic Encyclopedia that there are two saints named Honoratus, but tracked our man down in Brittannica (1974). "Servius, also known as Marius (or Maurus) Servius Honoratus," is how they list him. He did a big commenatary on Virgil, "a precious source of knowledge about Roman antiquities" and my 1944 Brittanica calls him "the most learned man of his time." Aside from the attribution question--Brewer's certainly could be wrong--and some clean-up I think it's a useful addition here. I'd never seen it and will have to shoehorn it into my discourse. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 14:56, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
Mangled manga
Hey, nice job! Not many people can translate that rare and incomprehensible language known as Gibberish into English! :^) - Lucky 6.9 01:58, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, Lucky, I'll proudly remove it, then. :-) I'm reading Bathing here, on Cleanup 21 Sept — hilariously over-encyclopedic. "A swimming bath is a bath in which persons propel themselves by moving their bodies." --Bishonen 02:19, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. It might be well-known around the world, but to me the local university was better known. Feel free to de-stub the article :) - Mgm 19:06, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
Hilarious!
Well, you know how to get my attention -- making a Middle English literature article cat. :-) I didn't even look at the history to see who wrote it. I just went in and pedantically talked about Pandarus and Pandaro being different in Chaucer and Shakespeare and included the legal charge of pandering and what a panderer is. Sorry about that, but very funny. Geogre 02:08, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Blended learning
They both had more history than I felt comfortable simply deleting, so I went to IRC #Wikipedia, and enlisted the help of User:Angela (who is the most meticulous, knowledgable, helpful, etc. Wikipedian I've encountered), and she took care of merging the histories at the hypenless title. Niteowlneils 23:51, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Minor, eh?
Moving the article, correcting all the links to it, including on my user page, and the internal references is minor? Wow. I'd hate to see what you consider a major edit. :-) Thanks for fixing my spelling. Could have sworn that I checked twice and that it was Lilo, but this morning both sources I used have two l's. I wonder why they changed in the night. Geogre 12:30, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I read your Barry article, and I rewrote my The Rehearsal article three times or thereabouts. I think the prose finally works. Anyway, I put in a reference to Barry at the end of it. The 'She-Tragedy,' though, is a microtrend, isn't it? It's a thing that claims the boards entirely for about 5 years? In that last par. of The Rehearsal I kind of say that you could stop playwrights from silliness for a little while, but they kept shouting at the rafters for 200 more years. Geogre 13:10, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Just a thanks for your useful additions to that article. Kicking myself for not thinking of them. Smerdis of Tlön 19:35, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
John Webster as a Rat
Do you know anything about John Webster being an informant against Dekker and/or Jonson? I know I know it to be the case, but I can't for the life of me think of anyone who says it. I have it as hearsay, I think. From Greenblatt, maybe? Anyway, it's not important, but am I right that he informed on his friends? Geogre 04:25, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sorry, no, I don't. My, ah, field is the 1696-1697 season, you know. At Drury Lane. Especially the casting repercussions of actor Hildebrand Horden getting killed in a duel in May, that's my specialty. You got any questions about Horden, I'll be fine. ;-) Sorry. Are you writing about Webster, or about the other guys? --Bishonen 12:54, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Oh, I added something to the Webster article, and I added that he had informed. The Singing Badger, who is a Ren. fan, removed the informant bit & asked for my source. Well, my sources are secondary, so that's no good. Horden? I've never even heard the name. I looked for what the DNB costs, by the way. It costs more than a car. I looked for used, beaten copies of the Concise DNB, and the used bookstores on Amazon are entirely clueless. They sell individual volumes of the 3 volume set as "the Concise DNB," and you can't even figure out that it's just one volume except that they say, "The book is in good shape." There are three books. The one book seller that has all three volumes wants $500, and the Concise isn't even that good for people like us. Compared to all that bother, a trip to Johns Hopkins library is cheap and easy. Anyway, it's not Webster making me wish for the old days of biking to a well stocked library -- it's everybody else. I also have discovered that the Mafia Movers who brought me to Baltimore neglected to deliver at least one box of books. Geogre 14:29, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
No, no, I was kidding about Horden, I just wanted to mention the most minor figure I could think of there, to satirize my own shortsighted peering at these ephemera of history. I'd be flabbergasted if anybody had heard of Horden. (Mind you, he was a promising actor, so for all I know he might have become the next Betterton, if he hadn't been killed in a duel at a young age.) You're describing the very same Amazon phenomenon I was complaining about before. What's the point of offering books for sale in such a way? Who's going to buy a single volume without even knowing which volume? Bah. And each time, for a dizzying moment, one thinks they are talking about the whole set, and at such a reasonable price, too. Bah bah.
A whole box of books ?? Say it's not so. You're sure the box isn't, uh, somewhere? There are four unopened movers' boxes in my hall, where they form a convenient surface for putting down odds and ends on. What books are you missing, that you know of? --Bishonen 15:06, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You know, on my talk page, I didn't figure out that the title of the talk subdivision for Short View was a link to the article. When I read it, I was very impressed. Anyway, at least one box is gone. I already knew that they failed to deliver at least one table, though they delivered the legs for it. There are far, far, far too many missing books that I'm now discovering, particularly reference and particularly therefore a heavy box, that aren't around for it to be just my imagination. I have no unopened movers' boxes. I did a better job, when I moved in, of unpacking everything. I wonder if I can get a government grant to get a Segway scooter. That would be the perfect way to get to Hopkins to do research. I no longer have a laptop, but I still have paper and pens, and that's all I need.
I assume you saw the invitation to work on Addison and Steele. How do I explain that journalism of the period is something you either jump into over your head or not at all. My studies and interest could be 18th 1, but really they're Satire. Oh, and I added a couple of rakes to the list, and I added a little to the "Harold and Maude" article, critical stuff. Geogre 17:09, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Dramatists etc...
Hi Bishonen,
Thanks for your note on my page. Indeed, I'm no native English speaker, and just tried to follow the content of the former "dramatist" article - assuming that Wikipedia can't be wrong ;o) - only extended it a bit to theatre directors too.
Just two minor questions still to you:
Is the usage of the word "Dramatist" and "Playwright" as you describe it identical in all English-speaking countries? If that is the case I would make the "Dramatist" article a "redirect", without further commentary, to "Playwrights"...
In English language, can "librettists" be considered either "Dramatists" or "Playwrights", or both, or neither?
Regarding categorization in general: if you have particular problems or questions: just ask - not sure whether I'd be able to answer, I go only from my personal experience too, and from the three "basic" guidelines regarding categorization, i.e.:
Please make sure all English speaking people would experience "Dramatists" and "Playwrights" as covering the same. What I understood by now is that "Dramatist" is a posh term for "Playwright" in English.
In Dutch (my native language) a "librettist" is someone who derives a text for a musical production (Opera, etc...) from e.g. a play: a play is written by a playwright, while a libretto can be made by either a "composer" or the playwright him/herself (who then becomes librettist in addition to being a playwright) or a by a "third party" librettist. E.g. Janacek worked as well with librettos produced by the "original" playwright (such libretto is nearly never identical to the original play), with librettos produced by "third party" librettists, and with librettos he derived from plays (and other books) himself. If what you assume is true, then Janacek (and Wagner, etc...) could be categorized "Playwrights" (besides "Opera composers") - does that feel right to you - for me it still feels odd?
Regarding clicking on a "category" at the bottom of a "category" page: what opens then is the parent category you clicked. In fact the categories in the box below on a category page are all the (direct) parent categories. For "higher-up" parent categories you keep clicking on the Categories below in the category box, for every new category that opens, till you reach a "top" category. Now that's theory: categories are still in expansion, and major hick-ups occur. See also Graph/Tree comparison on wikipedia:categorization.
Say, did you make redirects for all the forms of The Short View and A Short View and Short View? Just asking. That's what I've been doing non-stop for the Licensing Act article now (and redefining links that are to the 1692 Licensing Act). Great article. I think I may have to put it in your boast file, if you don't, soon. Geogre 18:12, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I did the A but not the The (nobody calls it that, and if they do they deserve to get lost). Oh, hey, though! You just made me realize that it's imperative to redirect the spelling Prophaneness. That's often used, and is indeed the original spelling (which I thought proper to modernize). Absolutely. Thank you. Isn't smutty a great word?
I've been too busy writing to update my boast file. ;-) You put it in if you really want to, and Restoration comedy, too. Did you see what a sad stub that was before before Bish blew all the hot air into it? It's not done yet, I hasten to add. I've got all this John Vanbrugh comedy stuff in my text editor, but I've realized the 1911 EB architecture part is beyond cleanup. It always was beyond me to rewrite. :-( I have the references, but I just can't focus on the subject of architecture, it's, well, never mind, it's just not interesting to me. I'm thinking of putting up a call for help on the Pump or something. Though I'm sure people (e. g. Giano) have better things to do, this would probably take some reading-up. The only Vanbrugh-as-architect thing that I like is the tease couplets: Swift's "Van's genius, without thought or lecture,/Is hugely turned to architecture, and somebody elses epitaph, "Lie heavy on him, earth, for he/Laid many a heavy load on thee". (The second one is misquoted all over the www, nobody cares how verse sounds.) It really was a delight to see your Licensing Act, Geogre. --Bishonen 19:23, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You're right: Prophane. I've been using this antique Oxford Companion for material, and it always fussily provides exact titles. Whatever was en vogue in 1920 is what it uses. In general, that's not bad, but it can lead to problems with, for example, Elizabethan play titles, where they've all been modernized in editions and classrooms. I like the longer version of your article, as well as the original short version. I haven't looked at Restoration Comedy. I should probably stay out of your way on that for a while, since I'm nothing but a fan of it and certainly not a student of it. I'm good at culture around the world of, politics near, and that kind of thing, from my Gould work, but even there I'm more of an 80's and 90's person. As for Van's architecture, you'd be better off with some of those interested in Olde Englande, I think. Now that I've characterized them thus I'd better not name names, but there are people who really, really obsessively note every building. I've encountered quite a few rave reviews of his architecture, though, in art history texts. Perhaps an art history site that's popularizing would have adaptable material? I had never heard Swift's comment before (to my shame), nor the epitaph. (There are so many popular elisions of 18th c. verse that "everybody knows" that it's annoying. They most often clip a foot of the verse, for the popular mind seems to like quatrameter. Maybe that's a sign of the general IQ or something -- people can now only remember 8 syllables in a unit. ("All that glitters is gold," I hear.)) Geogre 20:40, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
De novo :-(
I keep getting logged out, sometimes just a few minutes after I did something. For once I create an article de novo (She-tragedy, a few minutes ago), and I have to get kicked out and go and do it anonymously. :-( I don't know if it's Mozilla or Wikipedia that hates me. The English Wikipedia, that is. Strangely, the Swedish Wikipedia, that I visit so rarely, keeps me bishonen for weeks on end.--Bishonen 22:11, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Orthoepeia
Thanks for the help, my young, beautiful, androgynous, homosexual, Japanese friend. You've caught me being quite lazy; I'm still getting the hang of this, though.
Not sonnets
Hmm. I was speedy deleting, earlier, and someone seems to have taken it ill. Can't imagine why. Anyway, my user page got blanked. I rolled it back. Then it got blanked again. Hadal rolled it back (one minute had elapsed between attack, reversion, attack and second reversion). Ah, well. I was going to ban the user, but the IP's history shows erratic and sane stuff, meaning that it's a floating IP and probably AOL, so banning is a bad idea. All the same, if there's a repeat, I will put on a 2 hour ban or something. That ought not kill AOL too much and yet stop this monkey spanker. Geogre 05:15, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
What's this?
Vindö just came in, and I can't figure out what a "yard" was, or if it's copyvio. Geogre 12:43, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The contributor means to say yard as in shipyard or dockyard, except referring to a small place that used to build sailboats, not ships. It's the same word in Swedish no matter the size. "Famous" would mean famous in the population of "Swedes interested in sailboats". I have vaguely heard of the Vindö boats as classic long narrow handcrafted wooden boats that sailed well.
Here's a link about the place. The text's not translated from a websource as far as I can see, but has much the feel of being from a book. Nothing to be done about that. --Bishonen 16:33, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Ah. There is a Norwegian patriot on the loose, editing from an IP. He is very industrious, and no matter seems to be too small, if it's Norwegian. (BTW, "Cool and Crazy" was on the cable TV last night, so I saw it again. Odd movie.) Haven't heard from you in a while (by our standards). I keep trying to e-mail you pictures, but my ISP cuts them all off. Geogre 23:45, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Well, as you know, I wish you'd correspond via e-mail. But I've given up on that. The Wikipedia site is now so slow to load that I'm completely frustrated. For a large part of today, for me to a) go to a page, b) open the edit field, c) post a message, d) preview, e) save, has meant at least 20 or 30 minutes pure waiting time. Actually more, as I also need to keep checking that I haven't been logged out (=more loading). That's provided I don't get an error message that the whole process has crapped out. I don't know if it's the Atlantic divide or if it's the same where you are. But I'm sorry I haven't written, I would have done if I'd noticed that you replied to my "Ping" message, but I only just saw you did. See, another inconvenience of conversing via Wikipedia is that only the latest edit to a page, as it might be to your talk page, appears on my watchlist, so if there's been an earlier one higher up on the page, it's extremely easy to miss. Anyway. Good night, "Geogre". I wish you'd be George again.--Bishonen 00:32, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You're right, of course. We should go back to e-mailing, and I started last night, but my e-mails seem to be either mopey or dopey, with no middle ground between. Geogre 20:07, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Yes I do like his work, and I've actually seen some of it (30 years ago), so I'll give it a shot. Thanks for your nice note. Have you seen the history of Worcestershire sauce? Wetman 00:38, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think it a pity you have chosen to revert your edits at John Vanbrugh, I have been watching the page for some time, and could no longer bear to look at the many mistakes and errors on the Blenheim Palace section. I have played the Devil's advocate really, as I am not a great admirer of his architectural skills, but his many talents deserve better than they are receiving at the moment on that page. I think you should reconsider your reverts. Giano 09:34, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Funnily enough I didn't know you and Wetman were planning a re-write until I contacted him to have a look at Blenheim this morning, (and saw your messages) as I felt I was becoming Vanbrugh's apologist rather than editor. Wetman would do a better job on the section than me as he is more detached and takes a more intellectual approach. I just like to dispel some of the myths of 'haute' architecture and make it (hopefully) more explicit to the ordinary man. I'm always nervous about editing other peoples input unless there is a gaping error.
Hence, I was reluctant to do the arrogant thing and rewrite so many other peoples edits; but to be frank, I wish I had started from fresh on that section as it is becoming more and more disjointed, but it is now more or less a rewrite. I don't think that section can be from EB as it had too many mistakes (Floors Castle for one) also it was too negative and badly written, and ill-informed (rather like the rest of the page!). The Blenheim Palace page itself is appallingly awful too, and I might go there sometime, but at Vanbrugh I wanted to write the design of Blenheim from the architect's's point of view and explain the reasons behind that bizarre design, and put into context the famous row with the Duchess, as the page is supposed to be about Vanbrugh the person as well as his works, and John Vanbrugh is the place to counter criticism rather than Blenheim Palace - or so I think!
The second I have saved this message I'm going to John Vanbrugh to clean out all the rubbish left in that section, didinfect it if you like! - Don't give up on the page or it will stay the mess it is, Wetman will probably tweek what I have written and then be encouraged to rewrite the main architectural section - which would be the best solution. Giano 11:34, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You may well be right, although it has been heavily edited, I don't think 'CV' was a word in 1911. I have just done a drastic thing to architecture - it's no loss as the section was in places incoherant and the dates contradicted each other, if some kind person just copy-edits it now, it will suffice untill some-one (!) who knows something avout the subject delivers the facts. Giano 12:31, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
NOW!!!!!!!!! will you revert your reverts? I'm not happy with the piece about the theatre at the bottom of architecture, I'm not even sure if its true, I just tidied it up, perhaps that belongs in your department. Does anybody know what happned to this theatre? Giano 09:09, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm thinking.....(sometimes a slow process) at the moment the architecture is not in chronological order, I was going to do that today (but time ran out) and check the dates and put some more in, the old ones were mostly wrong; what if, (and this is an if)you get the plays in chronological order, amd me the architecture (I'm planning a bit more on the other houses) and perhaps his relationship with Nicholas Hawksmoor, then we do away with these headings, and have new ones for example '1700 - 1710' because at the moment it sounds like he stopped writing, designed a few houses and died, which is not so. I hate the Vanbrugh in London section, so what if a pub is named after him, did he have his Sunday lunch-time pint of beer there? - I doubt it!
I see the portrait of Vanbrugh has disappeared altogether - was that intentional? I don't mind if so, it was the best I could find and not brilliant, move the pictures where you like, I don't know how to, I just dumped them in and hoped for the best! - but I do think pictures help to grab peoples attention and make the whole thing readable.
The meeting between Vanbrugh and Duchess, I found in an old guide book to Blenheim Palace. I'll do the sources later, its mostly just stuff I have absorbed over the last few years working in England. Whatever happens we need to sort these two main sections first, then if you like the new heading idea, we can intersperse our paragraphs, though it wont be easy as he often did two thing at once - I'm not completely sold on the idea. so if you don't like it, or can see the problems that'a fine Giano 17:35, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi Again, I'll sort the picture out later, wish we could find a colour one though. Have to spend the day (most of it) taking ungrateful children to various sporting activities and then social occasions - Oh to be young. Not happy with architecture at all,Castle Howard, Blenheim and (to be done Seaton Delavel) need to be chonological in the same section, but individual, then a couple of lines on the rest, it has to be architectural theory and concepts though otherwise the info. belongs on each buildings own page. John Vambrugh will be a brilliant page, but its going to be a long process. Yours reads really well. London has to go! And be incorporated elsewhere!Regards Giano 09:42, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It WILL be featured article even if it kills us! - Have played about with Blenheim datewise (what do you think? - we can always revert) and sorted out who appointed Vanbrugh, which I was pleased to find. Think perhaps we still need to keep seperate compartments for drama and architecture but in some sort of chronology, yours is fime mine still needs sorting but this is supposed to be a biograophy, we need some personal stuff, relationship with wife, mistress/es? children etc. I'll see what's about, I want to do abit on Seaton Delavel, as its his most architecturally pleasing house (my view). I would like to bring all the houses under 1 banner sort of sub-sub headings can that be done? Perhaps it will have to be architecture 'an intro', then three headings for the 3 hmajor houses and a conclusion with mention of the rest - I don't know. Will think! Picture looks great Giano 14:42, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
1066 and all that!
Glad you like the bolded bits, I wasn't too sure at first, it can easily be changed to '1066: ...' rather than 'In 1066'. Do call in Geogre, he's a great guy, he and I did a joint effort once before, nothing as monumental as this though. Regarding you reference to quotes: I have many (I think)witty quotations, do you think there is room for them all, One from 'Pope' mocking Vanbrugh's bridge at Blenheim:
The minnows, as under this vast arch they pass, murmer how like whales we look, thanks to your Grace and one which made me laugh out loud, Vanbrugh's suggested siting of the collumn of Victory to commerate the site of the former Royal palace, where a King had kept his mistress, bought this reply from the Duchess:If there are oblesisks to bee made of all what our Kings have done of that sort, the countrey would be stuffed with very odd things
Do you really think there is room for all this? The problem is going to be knowing where to stop here! Regards Giano 19:01, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sorry about fanciful, sometimes I run out of adjectives and type an italian one into my package to see what comes out, I've just asked my adolescent (English speaking) what he made of fanciful and he stuck his finger down his throat, enough said! I like the idea of quotes section have you heard: 'that thing called an object of great beauty, that HE hath designed......' The Duchess on the subject of a tower at Blenheim; she was better than Nancy Astor and Margot Asquith combined. Vanbrugh to the Duchess: 'If you find a house in the bridge, pray go and live in it' (these are from memory I would need to check them out for accuracy) but we could be in danger of indulging ourselves here! Yes, some twit will come along and link all the years, we will just have to risk it, I can't see why people have to do that. If some one wants to know about a year why not just type it in anyway. I still think it may look better '1066:' rather than 'In 1066' The sub-subs I like the idea of, but we need more fotos etc!!!
I may not have much time for this during the week. If I disapear, for a few days, don't give up Giano 20:36, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bishonen, I'm a student of art, this is a copy of an old master I have done, I'm new to Wikipedia, and have been following the convesation and brilliant work you and Giano are doing, I'd like to help so have loaded it on your Vanbrugh page - hope you like it. Best wishes Alessandro 21:37, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hello Bishonen, Gosh! Alessandro has been a great help, what a talent. Perhaps it needs moving on the page - I have altered things about a bit, and done some rather theatrical headings (change them if you like, they are only an idea) The last two sections need to be expanded, can you do a little (or lot) on effect on subsequent theatre and today etc for legacy section. I'll look up my sources, and may be do a little on Seaton Delavel the last great house built from nothing, and then, I think we are done, and someone else can come and edit to death. I don't mean to sound bossy, please do what you want with the page, I seldom take offence Giano 08:38, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think there is something wrong alltogether, it is taking me ages to edit too, and (I think) I'm on the other side of the globe to you!) My email page won't open so I don't know if you have seen the one I sent this morning.
To recap: JV has been nominated for featured article, no-one seems to like it (apart from Wetman who kindly put it on) I have countered some of the criticism easily, someone has said there are better pictures on a google site, but they are all copyright, not like Alessandro's talented picture! The bold dates can be changed but do you want to, (we could just do 1705: rather than In !705 etc, but I don't know another way which would not result in a complete confusion of what he was ding when, with so many things happening at once. I don't know what you think, but I think as a joint effort its pretty good as it stands, any student can dip straight in and extract the information they want, which is the point, or so I thought. So lets not get despondent abpout the critics. Regards Giano
Bishonen confused by cats again (now nowiki'd!)
No bother, always happy to help. Anyway, it looks like they are all in Category:Plays and not Category:Drama now. Sometimes it just takes a while for the actual category pages to update. -Seth Mahoney 17:03, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)
Excuse my intruding with two points:
I'm not sure which of you nowiki-ed but in any case, putting a colon immediately after the opening brackets (as Seth did above; do section edit to see his Wiki-markup) is fully effective and easier.
If verifying removal is urgent enough, it appears that an edit of (in your case) Category:Drama forces the system to update that listing immediately instead of doing it in background in its own good time. (This is esoteric, but similarly, it appears a cat tag that is not in the markup of the article, but gets appled bcz a template transcluded in the article is changed to include the tag, will sometimes never show up until the article is edited again; i'm vague about whether this depends on nested templates.) Of course, even "dummy" edits (adding a blank at end of a line, e.g.) that make no visible change still clutter the history, but doing it once can do wonders for your confidence, and obviate most future need to see the result promptly.
All that you say feels very familiar. As to "brilliance", i learned abt the colon by noticing someone editing it into what i had writ, without comment. [blush] And learning the edit-it gambit probably involved the brilliance of finally doing an experiment after a long series of coincidences: you see a lot of hangers-on if you decide that some category names really need to be changed.
Oh, wait a minit: i unconsciously read into what you said that you noticed his talk page listed on the cat page. Just mentioning it to keep you lying awake at night. [wink] --Jerzy(t) 20:17, 2004 Oct 13 (UTC)
Buck up, me hearty: Gather up the courage that i know you have, my strong friend! [Supposedly the way that pirates and perhaps sailors in general talked to newcomers.] the siblings are in (perhaps among others) Category:Written stuff (or whatever)Category:Drama bcz because they contain the corresponding tag Category tag, in this case Category:Drama with the first colon left out. Edit each of them the misconceived sibling pages, change the corresponding tag to a Drama Plays tag Category:Plays with the first colon left out, & bingo without further ado, they're moved. (They'll look, as discussed, like they're in both both the old and new categories, but as discussed, be patient.) Remember: a cat (Category, but of course you know that already and i won't repeat it.) is just a fancy species of page. (You know that a cat can look at a king don't you? A proverb that means "You have no reason to complain about my looking at you; everyone is used to being looked at, even the most powerful being looked at by so powerless a being as a domestic feline". Well, if it's a page A pun: a page can mean a WP Cat page, or the kind of liveried servant that kings used to keep at hand , it'll get the chance to. Invocation of the story Puss in Boots where a cat acted like a person and/or of the nursery rhyme "Pussycat, pussycat, where have you been?" / "I've been to London to visit the Queen."; a Category page acting as a royal page would have constant opportunities to look at a king. Bada-bing, bada-boom. Imitation of the sound of a rim shot, as executed by a night-club drummer to be sure the audience recognizes that the comedian on stage has delivered the punch line of the joke, and doesn't sit waiting for it to come. ROTFLAMOJ. "Rolling On The Floor Laughing" is a standard Web exaggeration for expressing appreciation of a good joke told by someone else. "...At My Own Joke" is my own spur-of-the-moment addition, mocking myself for pretending that what i had said was funny enough to deserve mention. (Laughing at one's own joke is often assumed to be rude or pathetic, especially if no one else is laughing.) How do i stand it? Standard line supposedly delivered by comedians who don't realize that the audience is merely bored or irritated. It is shorthand for "The things i am saying are so funny that i too have to laugh at them, and they are so funny that it hurts to laugh at them".)
[Strike-thru & (bolded) replacements by Jerzy(t) 05:59, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)]
BTW By the way, i notice now that Drama does not use the pop-culture def Popular-culture definition. that contrasts it with Adventure, Comedy, and Documentary, Typical catgories in a video rental store, or in a film review. and while the text of a Cat should be far less extensive than that of an article, IMO In my opinion an explicit sentence to avoid that confusion is in order, within the Cat text.
I also note that the descrip of WS Apoc [William] Shakespeare Apocrypha is unreasonable; the cat w/ with that descrip description should have something like "Apoc'l WS plays" Apocryphal Shakespeare plays as title, since IIRC if i recall correctly there are apocryphal WS poems. (I think you understand that no article on non-dramatic poetry, nor any cat that includes it, can be a child, or any descendant, of drama?) If it were me, i might rename the Cat, but also might just say in its Talk page that it should be done, bcz because the quick & easy move tool the WP command that changes the name of an article, and uses the old name as a redirect to the renamed version doesn't work on Cats. (But you seem to have moved so many articles into Plays. So you'll want to know since you have demonstrated willingness to do work that some would consider too long and boring how...) To rename a Cat:
Create a new Cat with the new name (you do so know how),
Copy over the old text,
De-orphan it slang term: give it a parent so it is no longer an "orphan" category by editing in (at least one) suitable tag, of a category it can be a sub-Cat of,
Edit the tags in all its children (subcats and articles) to change the name there,
Unless there is a proper use for the old name, consult Speedy Deletion Wikipedia:Speedy deletion & put it up for speedy Like VfD (Votes for deletion) but immediate or same day, with no real discussion.
Finally, if dramatic port'ls portrayals of JC Jesus [Christ] fits in Plays (or Drama for that matter), plays must include drama on film; isn't it time to get such a category turned into a sub-Cat of Plays?
Just a little something-else to keep you awake nites. [smile]
--Jerzy(t) 05:59, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)
I'm pleased by your willingness to ask, and by your obvious interest in what i also think is an important aspect of WP. I'm going to go thru (above) and insert the translations in italics, within the confusing version. BTW ("By the way"), "descendancy" is a pretty good coinage, IMO ("in my opinion"), but not at all typical English. "Descent and ancestry" would do the job well.(And "Ancestry and descent" would be still better, since that order warns the reader of the context, instead of leaving them thinking "Going downstairs and ancestry? Huh?")
is simply a link to the article of that name, IMO a lazy substitute for, e.g.,
Drama is any form of performance where actors (ranging from trained professionals to children "playing pretend") speak and/or move as if they were other than their real selves.
(but i'm not suggesting that resembles a good "annotation" (my own term) for Cat, except in having the link and being at worst a little too long). You probably can write a better version.
is just another Cat tag, such as might appear in an article. Since it is on a Cat page instead, it has the effect of making the Cat it appears in a sub-Cat of Genre.
By the way (and even tho i don't want to even look in it for fear of being sucked into a black hole) Genre seems to me a bad Cat title almost anywhere, and definitely bad here:
I'm pretty sure it has to be plural. ("Drama" isn't, but my explanation of that is that "drama" means both "an instance of drama" and "all instances of drama".)
"Genres" could be restricted to any of a number of creative fields: literature (in the sense that restricts it to verbal works), painting, music, etc; if i recall correctly, genre is a really opened article, and without specifying which media and so on the classification being applied to, it is no more specific than "types" or "kinds". In my opinion, someone needs to figure out what was intended and probably arrange for it to be renamed or simply eliminated once everything in it is checked to be sure they are in some other Cat.
And I'm delighted, absolutely delighted, to see that you've put my Talk page into Category:Genre.
And you should understand that i mean this in the most loving way possible: You sadistic bastard!
[wink, smile]
--Jerzy(t) 17:09, 2004 Oct 15 (UTC)
Under Chairman Mao, Life is Happy and Gay
My friend Bo told me that, when he was a child, he danced for Chairman Mao, and the first sentence he learned in English was the above.
I just read "The Shepherd's Week," by Gay. What a cool poem. There are so many neat poems not by Dryden, Swift, and Pope, you know. Anyway, this was anticipatory to writing up an entry on the poem. I'm considering an article on "the pastoral debate" of the early 18th c. It's a pretty tortured thing, but it shows up in several notable poems. Namby Pamby, Pope's references in his blastings of Philips, and Gay's Shepherd's Week are all entries in an argument about how the pastoral should be written (basically, whether you could update it, or if it always had to be Damon and Chloe, etc.).
I keep trying to send images your way, and I keep being thwarted by my ISP. Geogre 03:30, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Cibber Gibber
I wonder how you'd feel about the sidelight that the Apologie is speculated to be one source of Pope's fury, that it wasn't the Shakespeare but, rather, an anecdote of Pope in a brothel that Pope hated so passionately and/or the Fielding scorn (and Hercules Vinegar swearing a warrant for Cibber's arrest on the charge of "murder of the English language")? I'm sincerely asking. Right now, the article is concise, but Cibber's role as target and focus of Tory hate was pretty extensive. Geogre 17:47, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Oh, Colley Cibber? I'd forgotten even doing that. I just did a quick emergency rewrite of the 1911 EB dump, putting in the theatrical stuff that was fresh in my mind after writing (much more effortfully) The Relapse and the first sections of John Vanbrugh (:-(). It's incomplete all right, do please put in all the Tory attack stuff you've got. I don't think that's a sidelight at all.--Bishonen 19:31, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Ah. I haven't read your The Relapse yet, but I will. I've now written a "Cibber as Dunce" section into the Cibber article. It's too long and loose, though. I need to go back with the exact year and phrasing for some of the things that I referred to (the bench warrant, e.g., and just what Cibber says about saving the finest poetry of the nation by literally pulling Pope off a woman). If you have the Apology, you might look at this scandalous anecdote. You can understand why Cibber didn't think Pope would be pissed and why Pope was. Geogre 00:11, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Have read your The Relapse, and it's a great article. My writing on the "Dunce" section was awful to start with. I think I've improved the prose now. I wonder if the promised activity on Charlotte Charke has ever taken place? I remember when I first heard about her, back in 1991, and it seemed then that all sorts of people who work on Queer Theory, gender, and "transgression" were going to be all over her like white on rice. Someone will no doubt have heard all about her and will write up the article, I'm sure, but it's not for me. On the other hand, I think I'll have to write Lewis Theobald, though I won't do as good a job on his editing as a Shakespearean would. Geogre 13:11, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sense flees
No, I can't follow those conversations, above. The trifecta has been completed, and I've heard from my mother. Perhaps you and I could speak tomorrow? All sense and theory fails me just now. I perhaps should get working on that Dunciad. Much should be said of it. Geogre 19:23, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Non Feature Article
Have removed it and left a note saying 'thanks but no thanks at the moment' I can only email you through the Wikipedia site, my hotmail won't open, here in Italy we are high up and the connection is always difficult at the best of times no broad band etc. I'm due back in London late this afternoon, and want to get to my books too, so I can check a few things. Why did I think you were in America? - I pictured you and Geogre jogging about in Central Park eating bagels, now I shall have to start again with you jogging about with elks in the snow! Giano 13:42, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC) (in the sunshine soon to be in the rain)
Images woo-hoo
Check out my A Tale of a Tub and Jonathan Wild articles now. This image business is easier than I thought. I so need my books now, though, and always the ones that the movers lost or that I can't find or that I sold for money long ago. The Jonathan Wild could not have happened without your help. Thank you again. ("A m00se once bit my bagel.") Geogre 01:08, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Also, thanks for the help on the subpages. My talk page was over 100 kb long. :-( I just clipped out the langorous discussions of deletion. Now that I find that my ISP's "no files" prohibition doesn't seem to apply to uploads and that I can upload an image, I'm even thinking of putting an image of Macheath on my user page as an illustration. Take some attention away from that dreadful boast box I've got and the essays. Geogre 04:06, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
When you scan images, why not make them a bit more high-res? Most scanners can handle pretty high resolutions, and I think you should scan @ at least 320 dpi. Low-res images don't print well, and since a print edition may be in the future for Wikipedia, I think we should strive towards large images or vector art. Future display devices may allow for a lot higher resolutions too. — David Remahl 15:20, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I see your point. I did go with low res, but I'm also a dial-up user, so I'm always one to worry over load times. However, I encourage you and Bishonen both to take a look at the Tale-stages image I put in there (last image in the article). I did a 200 dpi scan there (not what I do if I'm going to print, I agree), and the screen resolution on the full size version of it is exceptional. I can see details of the woodcut that I never saw before. Bishonen, you might like it because of its depiction of the stage. Geogre 18:51, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi
Fantastico regarding the images, I am about to make (any second now) a big change to architecture, take away all the little stuff surpluss to requirements and have the three big ones. Voted for Geogre, though less than delighted to see it was the horrible Fillioch (or whatever his name is) who was so horrible about my very witty (I thought) Acts I, II, and III - hope he feels guilty now; but well done geogre it is a briliant article Giano 20:45, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Me horrible? Po-faced, maybe, but really quite nice deep down inside. At least A Tale of a Tub looks like making FA, unlike my other current live nomination. Filiocht 14:36, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
Just finished all the edits which I was not going to do today, I've now written all I know on the subject, I've been a bit POV at Seaton Delaval. and I think the idea about Villa Foscari is all mine, but I'm convinced of it -so there it is, its a big thing to take all the other buildings out, but I think there was too much information, most of them are demolished or changed anyway, this is simpler a progression 3 stages: start; middle; end. What do you think - be honest!
Regarding the image tags: I don't know how to apply them, I just upload and give an explanation of where I found things and hope for the best, I moved Castle Howard in JV tonight and it fell exactly where I wanted it, but that was pure luck - In a wonderful hotel room tonight with a great view of Edinburgh Castle flood-lit shame Vanbrugh did not design that, London tomorrow night and a chance to check the books - good night Giano 21:37, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Well........er...! Some of them don't exist anymore, I just felt they were cluttering the page up, but they were not major works just alterations, no doubt later all the locals will come in,some day, and edit all their favourite houses into the page. I think I've done all I can do now, you can decide when its finished. London (and what passes for home tonight), so I can check a few facts and dates, but I don't think I have any more contribute much more. Seaton Delaval may prove a little contravertial as ,Villa Foscari, is a new theory, its OK; but there may be an odd accusation of POV, I can always change i. I like the idea of a quote section, but a warning about the page's length is already up! Take care Giano 06:32, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I just figured out how to apply image tags. Ok, after you upload the image, go to the image's page. Go to edit the page. Just add {{PD}} and save. I didn't figure out how to do it until now. (BTW, I've added a woodcut to Battle of the Books. The enlarged version is at 300 dpi, and it's enormously detailed.) Geogre 14:33, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Good Afternoon
Instead of playing with wikipedia, why aren't you working yourself to death like me and the rest of the world! The picture is great, I mean it, if you think its too big (just change the px, I only know how to do it in the format my pictures are in), but I think its OK as it is. I had the same problem as you logging in this morning and the whole thing was a bit slow. I reckon your plays read brilliantly, I've learn a lot, we didn't study much Vanbrugh at school by the time I arrived in England I only studied economics, girls, cigarettes and myself!. As Oscar Wilde said "Youth is wasted on the young" or was it Shaw. Any way to the point: Yes the lead has got to be extended, do you want to do it? If you do, I'll then come in and 'tweak in' a bit on the architecture. I think we need a little more on 'Marriage and the man' (not sure about that heading either) I realised this morning we had him dying without a date.
We also have to resolve what we are doing about the 'dates' as you know I liked them bold, but after the brief period with User:Clever-Clever I'm not so sure, the same with 'Act I' etc.
I have mixed feeling about JV on featured article, It would be great, I've never had a page there, have you? Nor have I taken much interest in it, I once nominated a page of some-one else's, and every one one so rude I never went there again. If they are rude about it, we shall just have to rise above it, look what that daft man said about Geogre's, but it looks like at least he Geoger will go through. I've asked Wetman to look at Seaton Delaval to see what he thinks, if I was a bit too POV, I don't normally get this in depth! but the page demands it. Will be away for a few hours afternoon, then back in L and some free time untill tomorrow. Problem is 'Adolescent' has turned up in London too, apparently school permits him hours/days (months it seems) of free time to study, which means he hugs the computer, (and we can only connect one at a time to the internet there) claiming its school work, I shall demand some money back of that school soon, he's never there! Regards 213.122.70.199 12:19, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) (That is me Giano, I can't log in!) Just had longer look. new lead is first class, I've nothing to add there - great job (logged in and out) Giano 12:40, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Just been treading in your department, and moved Haymarket section to the new 'Van the man' I think Haymarket tells a lot about 'Van the man'. If you don't like it there revert it back, it's only a suggestion really. I'm off now and wont surface again untill mid evening, I shall be on hooks now in case I've trodden in angry waters (mixed metaphor there!) Do revert if your not happy Giano 13:49, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi, JV is yours for the evening. Just arrived home, kicked adolescent off the computer and out to find a take-away Pizza for 4 (well, we are Italian) I had not spotted Filliocht's comments, better be careful what we say! - am sure he is a charming and deligtful person. No you edit away, I've plenty to do, Adolescent seems to have been here since Monday with a friend, and we've run out of mugs and teaspoons and (Wife not me) forgot to put the dishwasher on when we left last month (very unpleasant!) phoned wife in Rome who said; why are you always so hard on him, I can't do everything, is bambino hungry! Have read book on the plane which said "Dryden's death in 1700 marked the end of an epoch in Restoration comedy" so you see I am trying to improve myself. Funnily enough I have a book on Dryden's family home Cannons Ashby a country house in Northamptonshire, should you ever want to do a page on him. Will check emails next, one of ny book has a black and white Kit-Kat of Congreve and Joseph addison (was he a writer?) if that's any use, will go to library tomorrow if time. So you edit away, I will put bleach and loo cleaner in the dishwasher and turn it on, can't think what else to do, does Wikipedia have a page on household tips? Giano 19:00, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Woo-hoo2
And now the Jonathan Wild is seriously illustrated, thanks to you. The second image is very macabre and very interesting, and it's enormous, if you look at the expanded version of it. It's a ticket to the hanging. Howson really pulled some wild stuff (no pun) for his book. What a great thing to have. Thank you. Geogre 22:07, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sheesh
Ok, I give up on the Tale. How hard is it to be scholarly? I could have presented the whole history of each critical debate, yes. I would have made an annotated bibliography. I could do a history of criticism on the work. The authorship debate is the silliest thing in the world. No one even talks about it. I was just being a Good Guy by talking about it, because Guthkelch and Smith talked about it. <sigh> I know that other 18th c. folks would say I was fair. You know it. No point, after a certain interval, in trying to convince anyone else, though. Like I said, though, Jonathan Wild is the FAC article I've done. Oh, well. Geogre 22:34, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Woo - hoo3
Where you learn to do that then? Fantastico, really great. *BUT* have you seen what its done to the KB size of the page; but that need not be a problem, I've decided, the three milestones have to be drasticaly cut, they are too long, and the developing baroque theme linking them is not clear enough, so don't alter the picture size yet.
It may take me a couple of days though, apparently my son is on half term (I had forgotten) so he going to schoolfriends for a few days today. so at least I don't have to fight for computer, and say I am doing important business!
Great job with the images, superb clarity with JV himself, it would be shame to diminish even slightly. This is not a race to finish, is it? Regards Giano 07:48, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
PS
Why would a Sicilian peasant know who Joseph Addison is? Was he the one who did dope, and sang in a Jazz club?
Exploding Pages
Hi, With a huge stroke of luck, a client has just phoned to say he is unable to make an appointment, so am going to give JV my undivided attention for a couple of hours, I'm at home with a cold and a bottle of whisky; but you edit if you want to. I just copy text into a folder, and then dump with an edit in the end. Don't worry about the size untill something explodes. All my photos are in that formulae as I copied it from somebody else, and don't know any other way, but some people seem to do all sorts of clever things, you can specify right and left though which is quite clever, but I like the way you have it at the moment, are there any pictures of Seaton D in your book, old prints, ths type of thing which are old so PD?
I had completely forgotten Addison invented the light bulb Giano 10:43, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I have reduced the text by a few 100 words, added one extra image, sadly reduced your biggest to more modest proportions, and we have IKB to play with before our size is up to the limit. Regarding the stub pages (which are all crap) were I writing them I would bang on about their entire history, gardens, furniture, people who lived there etc; where as on JV the only information is purely connected with JV himself. See what you think anyway!
Filliocht has added a new heading to your new bits which are exceptional, I think we should just plough on now, and when we have all we think should be there, then take out surplus adjectives and generally tighten it up, this man is a big subject, he just can't be squeezed into a few sentences. Cold bad (I think I am dying) son gone away for two days, wife not here, all on my own, nobody loves me!Giano 15:29, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Never assume anyone sees the implications expand. No he doesn't edit, and I can guess exactly what he looks at! Giano 16:16, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC) Hey! Good news, the jazz article on todays FA is 37KB long so perhaps it doesn't matter that much 213.122.6.73 16:33, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Placement
Placement is perfect, can you take the frames off mine too? Thanks Giano 13:22, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Love the beefing up, brilliant; just a minor point of Englisch speek "undercover for the interests fostering the deposition" don't know why, it doesn't sound like the way they say things. I know your English is better than mine but......!
Why have the fames returned, I thought they were great without. Apart from that its great Giano 14:48, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
NO - we are not leaving it! Lets see it through we've put too much into this to walk out on it now! Must remove those frames though it was so much better without them! Giano 16:24, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I see we now have Castle H,BP and SD linked and mentioned at the beginning as well as intro to architecture, I'll sort it later, (I will put in use on for about 10 minutes while I do it) - I haven't a clue how to fix the photos, and am reluctant to expirement for obvious reasons. (there's a message for you on my talk page, by the way!) I think we are very nearly there, what are you thinking avbout the chronology table Giano 16:52, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi there - thanks for the message on my talk page (as it happens, I also saw your message on User talk:Conte Giacomo first and replied there too - and while typing this I see that you have seen it and posted another messsage on my talk page).
I'm sorry for the confusion - it is all my fault, I am afraid, through an excess of enthusiasm: I thought you had finished your edit and forgotten to remove the {{inuse}} tag as it had been marked as "inuse" for over 4 hours. Yes, four hours is rather a long time to prevent others from editing, particuarly as my edits were really just copyediting and markup rather than content (I has assumed that you were working on the content and left that alone, mainly because you are the expert and I am not).
I was just being bold and trying to fix the table layout with a <div>...</div>. I also made the images a bit bigger and added a "thumb", and a frame just comes automatically when an image is marked as a "thumb". I didn't realise that you had deliberately removed the frames. As it happens, I generally prefer the look of images with a frame.
Yes, I also copied the sentence to go at the top of the Playwright section because it seemed to be the most appropriate one to act as an intrioduction, as was suggested on Talk: John Vanbrugh. Again, not being the expert, I just duplicated something that was already there and would be factually correct, in the knowledge that the experts (you and Conte Giacomo) would sort it out if it wasn't elegant enough.
Unfortunately, the wiki way is to see your work "edited mercilessly and redistributed at will". On the whole, it leads to better articles - everyone has something to bring to the table. However, I can understand it is a bit upsetting for you to see a stranger (me) hacking away at your carefully crafted prose, but I hope that it doesn't put you off. If you prefer, I'll go away and leave you to finish the article. -- ALoan(Talk) 17:25, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Good morning Bishonen,
I've left you an email about the finale for your thoughts. The 'see also' section seems to have an external link to Kimbolton Castle, I haven't mentioned this in the text as to list every house with a desription would be tedious for the reader, but if Kimbolton is to remain then there must be mention of the others, these are all in a mish mash of styles depending on the whim of the owner and patron, so little to do with V's architectural concepts and ideals. I think you had some plays etc. on 'see also' - Why have you removed them? If you don't want them there we might as well remove the whole section. I will put a explanation on talk pafe as to why I haven't banged on for pages about other designs. Giano 09:58, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi, Giano, I've moved your message to the John Vanbrugh Talk page and replied there. --Bishonen 11:32, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I only popped in for a split second, thought about putting the flag on and could not be bothered, I was only editing it by section perhaps you were doing the same and that's why we were lucky. I'll be careful I've seen that anger of yours! (any way why didn't you put the flag on? Giano 13:03, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
David Remahl, a young Swedish programmer who kindly explained to me how to display images with or without frames, etc. It's all on his Talk page in case you're interested. He'd done a little programmer's edit in John Vanbrugh today, as Chmod007, coding the dashes in the reference list. My edit line was just for taunting him by pointing out I'd removed the dashes anyway. :-) (I was following the Wikipedia house style for book references — that kind of editing is more transcendently unimportant than I can even express, but by vocational accident I know to do it and it hardly takes any time, so why not.)
Well, I think I might be more stressed with the flag than without, you know, I don't want to use it any more. I'll just use a text editor and pop in and out as fast as I can.
Edit conflicts wouldn't even matter as long as we're not editing the same section. How about we keep each other posted on this page? I'm on "Playwright" with all its headings, I'll post here when I'd like to move on. Are there any sections below that you definitely think you're done with for today? Oh, and if I try to put years on "my" headings, will you do the same for Architecture and following? Just so we can see a)if it's possible (I mean, what years did the audience taste change?) and b) how it would look? And let me know your thoughts about it, I do agree that readers need help if they're not goinig to get lost in amongst all V's different activities. --Bishonen 13:45, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
put the message here so you get the sign, you can have JV all afterenoon, I am going out to lead a life (buy some food actually) as the incredible hulk has returned, and we can't live on take-aways. Have fun Giano 14:09, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bishonen, Its amazing we have not had a disagreement in this entire project, so try the table if you like, bit I do think putting it on the headings solves the problem, and creates a table (of sorts) anyway. Does it really look that bad? A table is going to be a long column, what is going to go beside it, and have you seen the length of the page already? That sums up my feelings, but this is a joint thing, perhaps we need a third view, what does Geogre think. If you really hate the headings lets go for the table. We are NOT going to fall out over this Giano 07:49, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sick as a pappagallo!
Is this really what you had in mind?
1664 Born 29 January
1686 Commissioned in the Earl of Huntingdon's Foot Regiment
1688 Arrested at Calais in September
William III lands at Torbay 5 November
1692 Transferred to the Bastille
1693 Returns to England
1694 Takes part in naval battle in Camaret Bay 7 June
≈1695 Moves to London
1696 Première of Colley Cibber's Love's Last Shift in January
Première of The Relapse 21 November
1697 Première of The Provoked Wife in April
1698 Publication of Jeremy Collier's Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage
1699 1st architetural commission
1699 Initial designs for Castle Howard
1705 Commencement of work at Blenheim Palace
1704 Main structure of Castle Howard completed
1717 Final quarrel with Duchess of Marlborough, and leaves Blenheim.
1718 Begins work at Seaton Delaval
1718 Work on Seaton Delaval Hall begins
1722 Blenheim Palace completed
1723 Knighted by George I
1726 Dies at Whitehall 3 May
1728 Colley Cibber publishes Vanbrugh's unfinished posthumous play "A Journey to London" and premières his own finished version of it, called The Provoked Husband".
and Seaton Delaval completed.
Like a vampire, I will not be about much in daylight this week, I have not abandoned JV, will look in when possible - Giano 22:09, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bish;
Very well - I surrender! Geogre has a point (I suppose), have you time to sort it, I am up to my ears in work here, and then have a working dinner tonight, until anout 12, and then have to leave at 6 tomorrow morning. Not emailed you today, so you've not missed anything. I'm really quite pleased with the article, if it does get dammed at FA, we must not let it bother us, I saw your remark about argueing on Geogre's page, we are in this together, I have been called a 'vicious rottwieler with a nasty bite', so don't worry we shall survive! US is off, so little more time than anticipated, but I will be away all day tomorrow.Giano 15:29, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The chronology looks pretty good. You know what a demon I am with 2nd Stuart politics or Augustan politics or whatever the era is called, so I'm always interested in putting in bits about the political scheme. Too bad I can't just be a Marxist critic. That would be much easier than being a marxissant critic. Anyway, I've explained a great deal more about my own suggestion for the organization. As for the FAC voters, I think the nominator matters more than one would suppose. Perhaps not. I can never tell whether I am the most hated, most loved, most ignored, or most ambivalent figure around. I seem to be all in different lights, but you should perhaps ask Waxman for the renom, since it was his nom to begin with, when you guys feel ready for it. Also, call on me when you don't care about my mucking about in the prose.
Not sure I get the last bit, please unfold.--Bishonen 10:40, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I keep having these flu-like symptoms that aren't due to the flu, so I can't tell when I'll feel strong enough for a goodly project, but I remain eager to help. Geogre 00:51, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I'm the only one allowed to be ill arownd here, and I've still got a blocked nose! Bishonen are you still editing in there because the flag. is up and I have permission from a 'personal site' owner to use images of Blenheim which is great, I'm uploading them as we speak, no hurry if your editing away, but don't neglect the elk, they need love and attentionn too! Giano 17:06, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
PS Could you use your skills to take the frame off the oval image of the portico at Blenheim -that would be great, speak to you later, off for an hour or two now - see we failed FA! 213.122.47.211 17:38, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC) Thanks for doing that, I can't edit tonight, keeps logging me out etc; just left you an email, from what I can see you are doing a great job. I love it Giano 21:44, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
We are getting in a mess here, I've sorted the 2nd doubling I shall not touch it again tonight, I keep getting outdated pages etc. I think we are in esch others way. It all yours for tonight - sleep well Giano
FA
I think you've dobe a great job in there, I shall not be editing al all today, so you can have it to yourself, or have you finished? What do you think about Geogre's comment on talk? I'm prepared if you are, but if you don't want to see your work dammed - fair enough. Either way its a very complete page, and I'm quite proud of it, whatever others may say. Giano 06:57, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Before you write another word, have a look at FA now and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and its edit history, and see what happens to long pages. So write for people with a short attention span! Have left you an email 213.122.111.26 16:17, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC) That was me in JV for 2 seconds have extended lead (as per your requirements) that is my very very very last word on this subject!!!! Giano 17:02, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
PS: I see its anonymous again server keeps logging me out
Admin
Hey, it's about time you become an admin! Be bold :-). — David Remahl 11:04, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I second that, btw, if you want it. Not sure you do, but, if you do, I think you'd get wide support. Geogre 03:15, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It is because you have no ambition to be an admin that I think you would make an excellent one. Wikipedia needs more admins who are NPOV. CheeseDreams 13:28, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"Template-style transclusion"
elements cross-posted
What I meant by "perhaps we could spin it off into a sub-page for template-style transclusion, if you're worried about Wikitax page length issues", and more specifically, by "template-style transclusion", is using, in the same way that we use templates, something like {{included template}}; the content of the referenced template is 'transcluded', or automatically put in the middle of the article with the above tag. For example, {{:Main Page}} would include a copy of the Main Page in the page you put it in. "Wikitax" is just a (but perhaps not the) name for the set of codes that we use in the MediaWiki software, like '' and [[.
In the case of John Vanbrugh, however, I don't think that this type of hiding of the content is a particularly good idea, as there is no large single block of content that is unlikely to want to be edited much, unlike on the PM article with the list of former PMs; a better tactic would be to do the much more standard Wikipedia method, where larger sections are summarised and the bulk of the content is spun off into another page (for example, John Vanbrugh as a playwright and John Vanbrugh as an architect, or perhaps something rather better-named).
Well, looking at John Vanbrugh, I think that you're right in that it really does need shortening, but, for example, the section on his "early life" alone could probably be easliy expanded by another few thousand words, if one felt the inclination. Part of the difficulty of being an editor is showing editorial discretion, and knowing what to cut. Thankfully, this being online, we can keep the "deleted" stuff, in another article, but if we show no judgement, eventually the article will be less useable, and so less good.
It's a horrible thing to do, to butcher one's baby article, but... ;-)
Edict from Giacomo:- Leave JV alone, there is no more we can do. We can play with it for ever. The page is credit to YOU! Giano 22:28, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Will you please stop fiddling with it Giano 09:40, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It probably will be! Giano 10:46, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I do not want people who are so stupid that they do not know what a stable is reading MY article. Giano 11:43, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Is there a great void on your screen, at the beginning of Seaton Delaval, ther is on mine where the photos used to be, 'Aloan' cannot see it, perhaps its just my screen, you seem to be very busy, I suppose I ough to read architecture, but cannot being myself to, the shock of my photos being diminished and stood end to end was quite enoughGiano 16:00, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
No void on my screen, no, but I can't say I approve of having the facade (=the whole huge building) of Blenheim Palace (=Vanbrugh's most famous achievement) reduced to postage stamp size! I think I'll drop a note about that one specifically on JV Talk (I see you have already complained about the monumental gate, but as a lay person, I'm worried about the facade, because the shape it is makes it so very tiny when aligned with the rest.)--Bishonen 16:12, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Something wrong with my server again, editing out of date stuff, I will log off for an hour Giano 16:41, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
)
It is done and well done, too. Y'all did exceptional work, and this John Vanbrugh is a better source than any found in any brief account. Excellent work of scholarship, collaboration, and comprehensiveness. Both of you are hereby awarded one Medal of Valor (of which I have no jpg's, so you'll have to hold it in your minds alone). Great work. Geogre 20:01, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
As I mentioned to Giano, the gold star comes the title of my hero for the day - you'll have to share it with Giano, so keep the title for the weekend ;) -- ALoan(Talk) 22:34, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Football cancelled because of infant-over-eating-of-chocolate-I-feel-sick syndrome; just as well,as I have fielded the first ball at FA, probably not too well. We will not shorten that page; I would rather see it taken off FA if it comes to it Giano 15:06, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I can't find the ignorant and illinformed comment you were just telling me about, where is it? Giano 17:31, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hey, my opinions are not ill-informed!
BTW, I agree with you guys: don't shorten the article. The whole point of it is to be complete. You balance the needs of comprehensiveness with the duty of conciseness well, and any change would be an imbalance, in my opinion. Your article is far shorter than the general Dictionary of National Biography entry, a bit longer than the usual Encyclopedia Britanica article, and does, therefore, exactly what needs doing: gives a full portrait that doesn't attempt to be all that can be said. Could more be added? Hell yes. All the cultural background could be thickened. Should anything be added? Hell no. Can anything be clipped? Not really, unless a whole play or building gets clipped. Should anything be clipped? Absolutely not. It would be better to know that you had written one of the best articles on the man around and not have an FA than to have to make that sort of concession to an arbitrary rule.
Speaking of football, 3:30 PM and it's the dawgs vs. the gators. Go Dawgs! Geogre 18:27, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Le Vau
" Le Vau showed a sensitivity to Italian Baroque architecture that was unusual in a French architect, and his College of Four Nations (1662; now the Institute of France) in Paris owes much to the Roman churches of Santa Maria della Pace by Pietro da Cortona and Sant'Agnese in Agone (1652–55) in the Piazza Navona by Borromini and Carlo Rainaldi" My personal view is that Vanbrugh was not influenced by Le Vau; or Versailles, with Blenheim Vanbrugh had a once in a lifetime chance to copy Versailles, he dod not, in any way. There is nothing in Vanbrugh's work which fits with the above summary of Le Vau; I think Castle Howard and Vaux le Vicomte is as far as it goes. Vanbrugh almost certainly would have seen Versailles though, any "Gentleman" could go there so long as they wore a sword! I would leave well alone. Giano 16:50, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC) PS: I completely agree with Geogre. Giano 16:53, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Mortgages
Very clever, but so was the Great Train Robbery are you quite sure this is all legal? Giano 20:48, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I thought you were tired of JV and going to leave him alone Giano 21:13, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
John Vanbrugh FA
Bish, I just tried to edit the FA page to reply to a comment, I had to try three times before success, the first two times when I pressed edit, it said: "John Vanbrugh was withdrawn". Then third time lucky. Is this why there is so little comment do you thing. Away all day so you are left holding the baby! Giano 07:49, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Oh yeah, and my emails are playing up again, so if you,e sent anything since 7 last night, I've not seen it! Giano 07:58, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
By the way, the John Vanbrugh article is wonderful and it's great to see high-quality, 'high culture' articles listed on FAC. Filiocht 15:27, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)
Home. Just leave it for a while as it is (length wise) Others are starting to agree with us, so hold fire for now, it's only one person wante to shorten it. The whole thing is stupid, really stupid. We have not written this for people with the attention span of a gnat! Giano 17:54, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Achille has just gone out for a new battery! Giano 22:22, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Bishonen of the Decade
Ah! But does anyone else! Did your Mother never tell you: you should not read other peoples mail Giano 07:14, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your message and congratulations on the Barnstar. If you list a 'high culture' article on WP:FAC it will draw less attention than the Simpsons or Sesame Street, but this listing is doing pretty well. I'd be inclined to let the 'to long' objection sit for a while as I do not see it drawing any support so far. It really is one of tthe three or four best articles I've seen here, by the way. Filiocht 08:50, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)
Now nominated on WP:FAC. Filiocht 08:39, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement (and the actually making it happen) on this. It hasn't been nearly as scary as I thought it would be. PRIIS 02:34, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Image problem with my Mozilla
As the code had previously been set up, the table was defined as belonging to class "floatright". I suspect that this class is defined in the default (monobook) style sheet, but not in the Cologne Blue, which I am using. As a result, my browser didn't know what to do with that class, and I had a column of images at the left side, with lots of empty space on the right, followed by the text. I just explicitly added a style sheet specifying "float:right". If someone had modified their stylesheet to make class "floatright" appear somewhere other than floating at the right, my change would foil them and force this to appear where you (we) want it. However, I find it very unlikely that someone would have done this. The long-term solution for Wikipedia would be to have someone add the "floatright" class to the Cologne Blue skin. I'll mention that on Village Pump or on meta. Mpolo 09:18, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, Mpolo, I could understand most of that, and it sounds good.--Bishonen 11:18, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Is a mozilla a type of dog, or a cheese? Giano 13:18, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ah, listen to the poor Internet Explorer victim, very sad.--Bishonen 18:34, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I only noticing now your commenting above! Thank yoo for the barnstar!!! What attention now John Vanbrugh is a now a receiving - Magnifico. I had seen those numbers a few days ago, I thought they were the result of one of your tweaks - I shall email you some private thought on the matter later today - Giano
Headings on John Vanbrugh
John Vanbrugh looks like that (e.g. 3.2.1.2 Sequel: The Relapse) for me all the time, with numbers in front of the headings. There is an option in your preferences to turn automatic numbering on or off: have you changed it? If not, perhaps you are picking up an old cached version: try refreshing. Hope that helps. -- ALoan(Talk) 09:57, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
That is what hierarchical headings are for! It makes more sense in mathematical, legal or scientific works, rather than biography, but it makes perfect sense for me for articles to be broken down that way. Each to his own, as they say. -- ALoan(Talk) 12:07, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Tak, Tanke, Danke, Gracias
Wow. What did I do to get the rose? Thank you for it. It smells lovely. (Odd that I was just starting to write again when you awarded it. :-)) I so need to get down to brass tacks with the Dunciad. It's just so daunting. I handled the Tale, but I had like 3 years of studying it. Dunciad is rather like trying to write the fair and comprehensive article on Hamlet. I can write when it was published and what it is, but that's just not fair. Thanks for the rose. Geogre 19:15, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I uploaded the image myself, used some fancy code from David to get rid of the frame, and then got an edit conflict when I tendered it! It's for all your articles. . If the Prose Rose catches on, remember you were the originial inspiration for it. You da man, Geogre. I'm really looking forward to your Dunciad.--Bishonen 19:39, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I think the Prose Rose is a great idea, actually, and it was well timed. Since I was making articles, yesterday (in guilt about doing nothing else), I finally remembered that I needed to put up any information from them to the "Did You Know" immediately, so I did. I did a "DYK: Thomas Middleton's A Game at Chess caused such a scandal that it was closed down after nine performances and the actors and author were put on trial?" Something like that. That Dunciad is going to take a while. I really need to buckle down to it, though. Geogre 14:26, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'm glad you're swinging into editing mode again, Geogre. I got the idea of Brilliant prose from the Featured article concept, reading somewhere that BP used to be the name for Featured article. Well, now I hit Save, but I don't really expect this message to reach you, I haven't been able to save any edits all day :-(. I asked about it on IRC, and apparently it's just me, everybody else was editing along as happy as clams. I wish I knew what that's about. It seems to especially affect any edits I make at the Wycherley article (you know which one, I don't even want to name it here). It seems f-ing systematic, I think the server must be a proponent of some sort of family values. :-(--Bishonen 14:42, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Queen of the Night
Well you've been having a busy evening, I think changes to JV are fine, leave well alone now, are you sure you want to take those things out. How can those few words I wrote have put the thing up a KB. See you and aloan have been having long conversations on my page without me! I've been to the opera this evening - The Magic Flute, so now going to bed singing the aria ha ha hah...ha..ho ho ho .ho. ha he ho hoho ha, trouble is not quite the voice, the neighbours will complain again Giano 23:50, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I only have to here Verdi's Chorus of the Hebrew Slaves, and I cry. In the meantime I will revert your last edit. Please stop playing with it! Giano 08:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hopeless. I can't see where to revert it back to. Let this be a lesson to you on fiddling. Giano 08:34, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Adminship
You're welcome, naturally. I suppose it's easier to resist the temptation when you already have good relationships with existing admins, so if you need something done that requires admin abilities, you know where to turn. Feel free to call on me as well if ever you need anything. --Michael Snow 16:46, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Problem with Server
Have you tried paying your phone bill? Giano 17:20, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
It is my ambition to be, (like you), one day, a member of one of the greatest civilizations on earth! Im th e meantime such a shame about the Italian opera! Ho Ho Hoo Ha haaa he ho he hooooo Hoooo Giano 20:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) Ha hooooo ooo oooo !
From the Cave of Spleen
Sorry. Some days are darker than others. Playing with Anthony on VfU wasn't helping my mood any, and there is a thinner membrane between sane and insane with me lately. (HAL 9000's final words come to mind, and I don't mean "Bicycle Built for Two." And I'm not counting that silly "2010," either.) Perhaps Sunday will be better. Geogre 05:13, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Did You Know that Geogre's article is on the main page?
Very cool, nice to see something interesting on DYK for a change.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 20:51, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Turns out that my article had been crap, though. Some folks (the Tudor patrol) rewrote it almost entirely, and justifiably so. I'm reminded of "Under Ben Bulbeen," penultimate line. Geogre 22:00, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"About votes for..."
When you archived a section of Geogre's talk page, you accidentally dropped it into the main namespace because you forgot the colon between User and Geogre. Saw it pop up on New Pages, so I fixed it. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:33, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Invite
Hi
I'm posting this to invite you to participate in WP:LCOTW , a project you may be interested in. Please consider nominating and/or voting for a suitable article there. Filiocht 12:37, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
Filiocht 08:39, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I understand exactly, and will start doing some of my own real work any day now, too. Meanwhile, you might run your eye over Oscar Wilde one of these fine days, if you've nothing better to do. Filiocht 16:55, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
Pictorial detail
On my user page, there is a photo of Macheath, as you know. Well, if you look to her right (our left), you see a small red dresser. On a pull of one of the drawers, there is a canvas tote bag hanging. It advertises a food co-op from overseas. :-) (Planning to move December 1. That's the target I want. Everyone else wants "by Thanksgiving," thinking it would be a great thing to have all the happy jolly folks bounding about around me. I think I'd get The bends if I was suddenly exposed to ebullitions of mirth.) Geogre 05:35, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hawksmoor
Never heard of the book!, will have a look out for it. Have not had chance to look at the poll page yet. Life has suddenly beem put on hold, as things frenetic at work. Speak on Sunday. Giano 07:14, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Kindly do not vandalise my user page, with your false modesty!!! Had a quick look at the poll page, looks like its Oscar Wilde, can't bear the man, - biggest social climber since Cinderella, and always a bit too pleased with himself for my liking - got what he deserved; as that daft boy he towed around, he was avery nasty piece of work indeed, (somebody a wrote a book about him - I read the review-which was quite enough to put me off the pair of then for life) I don't like the look of the others enough to want to work on them, Henry James was alright I suppose (did he write the 'Golden Bowl'?) I will keep looking though, they may have Enid Blyton some day, that's about my level of literature! - I don't think Hawksmoor was quite what Filliocht had in mind anyway! Giano 08:42, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sorry to interrupt.
On the FAC for John Dee, I swore to myself that I wouldn't say anything about Lord Emsworth's objection about the American spellings. I was just checking your contributions, saw that you'd breached the subject, and then, despite myself, said something. The biggest thing is that Emsworth asking him to change to British spellings means that he might miss one or two and thereby actually violate the manual of style by being inconsistent, as opposed to not violating the manual of style by adhering only to American forms. Grrr. It was after Emsworth's comment about proper Commonwealth English that I began looking at his contributions for any more stiff ruff stuff. He works in the 18th c., but always on characters that my principles object to somewhat. Geogre 14:31, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Then I messed it all up by letting my anger get the better of me and calling Anglicisms "twee." I shouldn't have done that. I have no problem with many of them -- "theatre" and the like -- but a ton are just idiotic and recalcitrant and reactionary, like "grey" and "gaol." I've seen "jail" in the 1680's and 1720's. The moment an American proposes the changes, oooooh noooo. Geogre 20:09, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I know it was bad policy, but I really didn't want a pother over the spelling of four words. I know it's the P.G. Wodehouse (aetat. xvi, not that it matters) vote, but my understanding of the process was that every objection had to be dealt with, one way or another--either enacted or refuted. Apparently the Am/Br thing is a combustible subject, so I enacted. I worked in a complaints department for many years, so I've developed a very supple spine when it comes to things like this. PRIIS 20:59, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Banning
I had to ban someone for the first time. Some kid named Crc24 moved my talk page. His account was only 24 hr old, so I got the chance for the first time to actually ban someone. Not pleasant. Geogre 05:52, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
So how do you ever find a moved page again?--[[User:Bishonen|Bish(Bosh)]] 13:17, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'd rather not say here. I'll e-mail you with it. If the person comes back again after the 96 hr ban and wants to do something like that again, I'd rather not reveal how I reversed it so quickly. Geogre 23:30, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
On the cover of the Rolling Stone
Last night, when I wanted guidance on how to ban a vandal, I went on IRC. Raul was there, and I prodded him a bit. He told me that I'd see my name in lights on Sunday. :-) Geogre 23:29, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Restoration comedy
It's really admirable what you've done there, I wish we had more contributors like you and less trolls and POV-warriors. GeneralPatton 15:19, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I wanna drink yer blood
Well Howdy there Bishoperson and your gud oll' frens in Swedishland, Ah had a raht gud oll time in Bushland. Allehlujah! So whats bin happenin on the gud ol wiki in ma absence, I see one of ma fotos has bin zapped as 'in doubt' (it was a bit dodgy to be honest!!!) Take a look mah new article, Ah' knocked that poor old cricket out in the small hours of the morn, whyl I cudna sleep. And you jus remember now 'Bush is gud, an Bush is God'... love from 'di Dracula'
Bishoperson, twas very frenetic, but ahm an insomniac, and yer need to check yer emails di Dracula
What strange people you seem to know! (ref above) actaully on Restoration Porn the 1st and 5th images are black on my screen too are black, if it helps (I've never liked to mention it) but that (I am sure) very atractive rose you gave to Geogre is also always black to me (thought it might have been a black joke Ho Ho Ho !) perhaps there is a clue there. Giano 22:48, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Black images
Hello. I saw your note on Geogre's talk page about black images at Restoration comedy. I use Windows/IE so I thought I would take a look. Sure enough, the first and fifth images are totally black on my screen. I'm curious -- is there another web site where the same images are displayed? I would like to see if they are black when I view them on another site as well. SWAdair | Talk 23:56, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Another site? Well, no, I made those .png's and uploaded them myself. The originals are from the web, of course, but they're coded differently now. One was originally a flash file, and the other one I wanted to cut off some bits of, so I re-saved them and took the opportunity to turn them into the .png format that's so highly recommended--kind of wishing I'd gone with regular lossy .jpg's, now. Please see ... oh, I see David is replying more effectively, never mind.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 00:07, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
By the way, taking JPEGs and re-saving them as PNG is very in-efficient. JPEGs introduce subtle variations in colour, which PNG cannot encode very efficiently using its compression method. Unfortunately, taking JPEGs and re-saving them as JPEGs is very bad for the quality...It is a dilemma...— David Remahl 00:20, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
SWAdair, could you go back to the article now, and try reloading (clear your cache first). I think I've identified and fixed the problem, but don't have a PC to test it with...— David Remahl 23:59, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
(Embarrassed to admit it, but I'm not exactly sure what it means to clear cache) -- I deleted all off-line files, cookies, history and rebooted. Still black. Is there anything else I need to clear? SWAdair | Talk 01:11, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Well, in Mozilla you hit "Reload", I think it's called something else in IE. "Refresh"? Thanks very much for helping, SWADair, I appreciate it. It's all getting to advanced for me, though, could you post to David's page. please? He may conceivably have gone to bed, as I am about to, it's 2 AM in our timezone. Hey, it just struck me: it could be kind of frustrating to see my caption (as I assume you do?) for the first image and not the image itself. It's not quite as kook as it sounds, unfortunately, more just grey and old and poor-quality.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 01:23, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
In IE I think Reload/Refresh does not always reload all linked images. I seem to recall that one can hold down "shift" by choosing it to fully clear the page's cache.
I'm actually surprised the problem isn't solved. It could be that _Wikipedia_ is cacheing the page (or one of its mirror sites). It just occurred to me that I have a Windows emulator that I can test with, so I'll be back in a few minutes when I"ve experimented further. Thanks. — David Remahl 01:30, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ha! Now that I look at Image:Love_in_a_Tub.png, it appears that my fixed image was never even uploaded! And yet, I know that I saw the Wiki confirming my upload! I'll try again... — David Remahl 01:34, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ok, this is getting really confusing. When I uploaded the image a second time, _both_ my revisions appeared at the same time. And this cannot be a case of client-side caching, since I looked in the emulator (which had previously not loaded the page). I've come to the conclusion that it must be MediaWiki that had cached the images. I've verified that it now works in IE4 (yeah, I use an old OS in the emulator), even though it took three Refreshes before it realized that �I had uploaded the new image...Hm. Anyway, as I replace the other corrupt image on the page, they too should start working, eventually. I don't know how to clear squid caches for images (for pages it is just "action=purge". — David Remahl 01:42, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
At any rate, the images are now telling me politely that they are the versions uploaded by you. Thanks, David, go to bed!--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 01:47, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Yay, after a discussion with the people in the #mediawiki room, it should all work. It turned out to be a number of factors conspiring against us, including server-side caching. I've now verified that it looks correct in IE4. If you tell me what program you used to save the images maybe I can tell you what to do to avoid the issue in the future. G'night. — David Remahl 01:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sheesh, I thought I told you that hours ago. Adobe Photoshp 5.5. You haven't gotten my e-mail?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 02:01, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
(dropping some indent) No, actually I haven't gotten your email. At first, I thought it was because my email program hasn't been running for a few hours (oops :-)), but when I started it it turned out I hadn't received any mail from you anyways. Are you sure you sent it?
Re: Photoshop...Does 5.5 have a "Save for Web..." feature? In that case I suggest you use that one instead of the normal "Save as" to save PNGs. I think the reason the other method produces corrupt files is that you haven't colour calibrated Photoshop. But that's outside my field of expertise. I'm also fairly certain that newer Photoshop versions don't have the same problem, but upgrading is a fairly large investment. — David Remahl 02:16, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Yup, I'm sure I sent it, to the address you supplied when you asked me to send the originals. Odd. I'll try it through the Wipedia e-mail in a minute, not that there was anything much in it besides telling you Photoshop 5.5. I actually don't use "Save as", I use... hmmm.. "Save copy". "Save as" only lets me save in Photoshop's own format. But there is indeed a "Save for web" feature, I'll try that, thanks for the tip. I'd really rather not use Photoshop at all, in any version. It's so much too big for my needs that it's difficult to find the things I do need in it. (You know, like Microsoft Word.) Is there by any chance a manageable, user-friendly, application for OSX that you can recommend, for somebody who doesn't even want to become an expert?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 05:05, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sure, it work work, but The Gimp is really not a nice app to use in Mac OS X. It is very Unixy, whether one uses the X11 app or the so-called "native" version.
Graphic Converter is a nice old-time shareware app that does most things you'll ever need. Preview (Förhandsgranskning if you've activated Swedish in Mac OS X) can export to a number of formats, but it doesn't handle scaling. I think you'll find that Photoshop's Safe for web feature is pretty simple to handle — it's like an app within the app. — David Remahl 06:33, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Got the Wikipedia mail
I got the Wikipedia mail just fine (to the same address).
I uploaded a new, fixed, version of the rose now. The cache may remain for a few hours / days, though. By the way, I think that claiming fair use for the "brilliant prose rose" is stretching the definition a bit...The criteria for fair use are (from memory):
Educational value (well, not really in this case)
Small portion of the work (yeah, I guess the image was part of a greater web site or something)
Highly relevant to article contents (not in this case)
No alternatives available (there are many free rose images on Wikipedia and in other places)
Doesn't reduce the value of the work (no, I guess it doesn't in this case, so that's fine, but crediting the author would not hurt)
I think you should try and find a better / freer rose image ASAP.
Not so much stretching the definition as vat ve here in Sveden call a bondförsök, actually. You're right, I'll look for a free one. Incidentally, how would I go about looking for an image on Wikipedia?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 14:53, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Extracted rose
:::Hehe, I thought that might have been the case :-). I started by looking at Rose, and there is a pretty nice red rose there (photograph). I also found _loads_ of images of Roses in the new Commons. commons:Rosa (very large page, will take a while to load). I extracted the flower from commons:Image:Rosa_sp.172.jpg, but it didn't have as nice a stalk as the brilliant prose rose, and my attempts to draw one failed :-). You may have better luck. — David Remahl 22:28, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
But, you know, there are other .png's that I've made myself in Adobe Photoshop in that article. For instance Nell Gwynn. It's _only_ the ones that I've used "frame" for, to display full size, that are making trouble. Not the ones where I use "thumb".
The reason that only the framed images show the problem is that when MediaWiki scales thumbs, it basically performs the same cleansing of the images that �I perform, removing the gamma information and other things that cause problems. However, when using frame, the original image is passed through unmodified. — David Remahl 10:37, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Re: ⇧+⌘+3, did you know that you can use ⇧+⌘+4 and select just a part of the screen to take a screenshot of? — David Remahl 10:41, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Yeah... and if I'd got the right cutout to begin with, I actually could have used Preview to export it, right. But that's the one thing Preview will do, so I guess I do need something more. I'm looking into the GIMP and Graphic Converter right now, thanks, guys. (When I say I'm doing it, it means my son's doing it. This is the reason I had kids. :-))--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 14:53, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Preview can crop too, at least recent versions. If your son hasn't found this URL, maybe it can help. Note that it requires a custom installation of Mac OS X. — David Remahl 21:12, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
My Preview can't. I thought it might come to this: you're telling me to get Panther, aren't you? I so much more like the way Jaguar looks, though. (Looks even better with the cool skin I've got on it.) Panther, to me, looks corporate and horrible. That's not to insult anybody who likes it. I'm kind of hoping for the Tiger, or whatever it's going to be. Thanks for the link, but I think the resident nerd tried it, and the whole custom thing, but he just ended up shaking his head. He's not a mac specialist like you, but he's a pretty good programmer. I was encouraged to hear you say the Photoshop Save for web feature is like an app within the app, I'll try it next time.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 21:51, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ah, yes, that's a Panther feature...I agree it is sad that Apple is toning down the original Aqua (long live pinstripes), but Panther has other advantages :-). — David Remahl 22:28, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the Extracted Prose Rose!--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 22:47, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for the improved rose. You know, it occurs to me that I know someone who has taken hundreds of MB of pictures of flowers, and it shouldn't be that hard to make them into .jpg's. I suppose Photoshop could make them into PNG's, too, of those are really better. Geogre 21:30, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
JPEGs _are_ generally better suited for photographs, resulting in small file sizes and adequate quality. However, it is important to keep track of the unchanged original. Use and display the JPEG every day, but if you're going to modify or print the image, go to the high-res huge (often multi-megabyte) TIFF or PNG source. — David Remahl 21:39, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Complaint
I've got a very nasty complaint! The first image is still black! Can't you make it red (my favourite colour). The whole article is far to long and wants breaking up into at leat 40 smaller pages; and there's far too much talk aboput sex; some of us have forgotten what that's all about, and don't need reminding - Thank you very much! Also are half those images necessary - I think not. Yours sincerely Mrs di Dracula of Alabama
PS
And that poor boy's rose is still black too, looks like that little dog has just eaten it, no wonder the poor critters tung is hanging out!
I can assure you young person I have no intention of even trying to download one of your filthy images. The Lord is watching you and your evility. You should check your emails as I've sent you an improving holy text. I just hope that nice Mr Jumbo cracks down on this porn peddling soon, and Mr G Dubya Bush sends all you evil ones to Iraquiland as soon as he can. Praise The Lord - Mrs di Dracula, Aligator Cottage, The Swamp, Alabama.
Riiiiiiight.... — David Remahl 01:00, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Oh, yes, absolutely, that's just my good friend Count Dracula channelling his mother. The salt of the earth, isn't she?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 01:11, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
My pleasure. If you've got the books at hand, or full references to them, you could give the list that extra spit-polish, if you want, by inserting place of publication before the publisher in the first five, on the model of the Paget ref: "London: Collins". Very interesting article! (Though very much not my subject.)--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 13:34, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out, I really, really appreciate it, if you were sufficiently interested in the article, you could go over to Featured article candidates in order to vote to support its candidacy or cite some things that you think could be improved. I’d like to hear your opinion, either way.GeneralPatton 20:09, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Palladian architecture
Keep your hands off my boy's work. He's a good clean living Italian boy, and a credit to his Mamma, and I don't want him touched! Mrs di Dracula Aligator Cottage, The Swamp, Alabama
Bishoperson, You just leave my boy alone, that's a nice little page as it is, it certainly does not want a load of people who know nothing about the subject whatsoever all coming in with their twopenny worth and irelevant links. And for your information my name is not Di as in lady Di, but 'di' as in 'of' and I don't like familiarity so Mrs will do. You just look to your own smutty article, if those plays were any good they would have all been serialised on TV, I like Planet of the Apes that was real drama; and its about time you did some house-work and archived half this page, its taking too kong to edit! di Dracula (Mrs.)
Emblems
I'm trying to come up with my own award. I want the "well oiled verbal machine" award for an article that handles an impossibly diverse subject in a consistent and clear way, an article that manages to make the incomprehensible obvious. I went over to the Commons, but, surprisingly, the people there haven't got pictures of machines! I guess they figure it's too obvious. Geogre 21:42, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I like the Linotype machine(pictured right). Perfect in this case, since it deals with typesetting words. And I bet they had to be pretty well-oiled to work at all :-).File:Linotype 1.jpegLinotype machine — David Remahl 06:06, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Bulleted lists and images
Do they make a mess when they're combined, as at Colen Campbell? My browser is Firefox on Linux, and it looks okay to me. What should I be doing instead? --Wetman 01:38, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Mine is Mozilla on MacOSX, and it looks OK on my screen now also, after I added the missing bullet (the first one on the list), but I think with bullets it's probably a bit fortuitous whether a particular user sees huge white spaces or not, as a matter of font size rather than browser. The text will go down the page below the image in line with where the bullet that it's "following" happens to be: it may be at the left margin as is proper, or it may be near the middle of the page, forcing the text into a narrow column surrounded by white wastes below the images (this is how the page looked on my screen before I made the tiny change). I'm explaining it badly, but my upshot is that I think images had better be attached to an ordinary prose paragraph, without bullets.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(Talk)]] 01:55, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Too late to write nice things about my boy's work now! You won't get into my good books at all. Can't stop here all night trying to reform you, I'm off to vote, before one of those varmints say nasty things - praise the Lord Mrs di Dracula
Palladian architecture
I'm sure I can find it in my heart to forgive you! - Who are these odd people above - friends of yours? Giano 20:40, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Why aren't they voting what's wrong with it? Its been on FA for at least an hour! I'm going to bed in a few minutes, how am I supposed to sleep? Giano 21:45, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
They like short articles - remember! Giano 22:08, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) PS I've just emailed some thoughts on the subject to you!!!!
Der Führer
As a matter of fact, my page is now displaying a youthful and very slim Adolf, I assumed it was because I voted support on FA to swastika. I tried your advice but he is still there. No matter, one of his henchmen shot several of my relations, so he can stay there and learn a little humility. Giano 19:14, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I have done that a million times and he's still there in a pair of road labourer's trousers. He was always such a common little man (quote from my Great Aunt who he fancied!) Drac
Just checked out every body else who voted for swastika, they are all clear; BUT why can't I have 'nice smiley star for acts of random kindness'? Hmmmmmmm???? Giano 20:55, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
That's very nice indeed thank you, I hope its PD! One of you compatriots has rid me of Adolf, I was worried people might think it was me! Not everyone knows of my many acts of kindness and generosity. Giano 08:33, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Aha! Just testing to see if you are alert, as a matter of fact I have had a very exiting day - but had to come home to work. Tomorrow all on my own. How I admire your enthusiasm for the beetles, I do wish I had been born so I too could enjoy that era. Tell me was it as exiting as Granny says? Giano 19:56, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
When one is all alone all one can do is fantasise about what one could be doing! Giano 21:21, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
PS The microwave has packed up because the incredible hulk came home and cooked a foil container!
My group is going to be for intellectual Latins, not opinionated foreigners, who read other peoples mail. Giano 21:53, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
What's wrong with that? -- Graham ☺ | Talk 21:55, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Oh, go and climb back into the sauna, and flog the neighbours with birch twigs or whatever the natives in your part of the world do on a Saturday night! Giano 22:10, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
You said "see talk" in your last edit of the above page and I've been hanging on, but nothing has appeared. Basically blame Giano for anything that appears in today's edits of mine that's incorrect, if he hadn't been so bone idle he'd have written it himself but instead he got me to do it... </tongue in cheek> -- Graham ☺ | Talk 23:01, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Impatient? Moi? Noooo... Anyway as I've said to other editors my aim in starting sections is to get the ball rolling, so feel free to edit anything to your heart's content. Particularly the literature section, as I haven't touched that yet... -- Graham ☺ | Talk 23:17, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Music
I was thinking more Toccatas and Fugues, did CharlesII compose as well? Giano 18:55, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Cibber
I was just researching the Variorum tonight. I plan to re-read it tomorrow and then start back on my favorite, the 4 book version, where Cibber is the hero, later. I think some of the specific charges made against him by Pope would be proper, but I could see FAC voters not liking them for thinking that they're a distraction. It's hard to emphasize to anyone coming at him cold just how little remembered he is own aside from the Dunciad. Geogre 02:21, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
More in there now. I was surprised to see him attacked in the Variorum, but there he was. The Variorum goes further in its notes by quoting Jacob Tonson's Lives of the Dramatic Poets. I don't know if you want it in, but it's this:
"Mr. Colly Cibber, an Author and Actor; of a good share of wit, and uncommon vivacity, which are much improved by the coversation he enjoys, which is of the best. JACOB Lives of Dram. Poets. p. 8. Besides 2 Volumes of Plays in 4, he has made up and translated several others. Mr. Jacob omitted to remark, that he is particularly admirable in Tragedy."
Pope's getting an extra dig in there with the tragedy bit, so that suggests a real desire to wound before '38. Geogre 20:57, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Aha, left-legg'd Jacob, the notable whig? "As when a dab-chick waddles through the copse/ On feet and wings, and flies, and wades, and hops: / So labouring on, with shoulders, hands, and head,/ Wide as a wind-mill all his figure spread,/ With arms expanded Bernard rows his state,/ And left-legg'd Jacob seems to emulate." Dunciad(1728), book 2. I just happened to know that by heart, naturally. Actually, I was looking for Tonson in Gutenberg, but he's always hard to find, with being all over the place in his character of publisher ("Printed for Jacob Tonson"). Van's best bud. But who was Bernard? --[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 21:29, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'll tell you tomorrow. Oh, what the heck. Carolina won by 40, and the new medicine is making me bubble, so I'll look now.
"Swift as a bard the bailiff leaves behind,
He left huge Lintot, and out-stript the wind.
As when a dab-chick waddles thro' the copse...." 3 Book Dunciad II 57-59.
So Bernard is Bernard Lintot, who had been Theobald's publisher and the publisher of several of the attacks on Pope after the 1728. Pope's note that accompanies the passage is a full page, so I'll wait for my trawling of Book II tomorrow to give particulars of why else he hated Lintot. There is a full-length book on Jacob Tonson that I've got, but I couldn't be persuaded to read it. I snagged it at a used book store, since it had belonged to one of my professors before he died. I think it's called Jacob Tonson: Book-seller of the Kit-Kats.Geogre 04:40, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Also interesting is the fact that a fan/relative of Theobald has edited the Lewis Theobald article. I'm sure he won't like the bit I just added, from John Dennis: "There is a notorious idiot . . . who from an under-spur-leather to the Law, is become an under-strapper to the Play-house, who has lately burlesqu'd the Metamorphoses of Ovid by a vile Translation." Damn. I really wanted to get in a bit in the Dunciad about the really scary line: "Dunce the second rules like dunce the first" and the fact that Pope (in a note to 2 lines earlier) says that a copy of the poem had been presented to George II by Robert Walpole. Geogre 05:56, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Congratulations on this making WP:FA. The cultural tone becomes more elevated by the day. Filiocht 09:52, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
Giano has a point, but given the problems involved in getting people to see that you can't write about the King James Version without including the fact that it influenced the history of English prose writing, it is a delight to see literate articles on important literary subjects get their due reward. On a different point, if you have any time to spare, you might run your eyes over Modernist poetry in English for me at some point. I'm about 70% of the way through a major expansion and have no idea at this stage how it reads because I'm just too close up against it. Filiocht 16:03, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
Aphra Benn
Yes Filiocht is quite right well done, we cultured one's are taking over.Is Aphra Benn that nice black American lady who talks about people's problems on TV. I like her, she's good. Giano 12:17, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Cibber Question
Ok, there is far more than enough material on Cibber in Dunciad (or will be when I go through the 1738 4 Book Dunciad) to swamp the biography. If I add all of the relevant-to-Pope stuff, it'll run to enormous length. If I add the relevant-to-Cibber's-reputation, it will still be as long as the biography. Either trimming will have to take place (it will anyway) or the article will need a somewhat controversial structure. It's possible to present it almost as a parallel biography, stated explicitly in the "Dunce" section. Also, the way that I'm going about the Dunciad article right now is to be indiscriminate and prolix at first and then chop down in retrospect (retrospect being a week or two from now, when I'm in south Georgia and have perspective), figuring that I can only add stuff when it's fresh, but I can weed stuff out any time. I'm going to write an experimental opening to the "Dunce" section today. See what you think.
Finally, it would probably be good to have a narrative section after the "Dunce" section -- a "literary significance" or "impact of the life" or something -- so that the reader isn't left with a bad taste nor left with Pope getting the last word. Geogre 14:15, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Well, the problem is that The Man and the Dunce are both dumbasses. I mean, "his work is slowly gaining a fresh reassessment by scholars", like you wrote before, was very beautiful and considerate, but, well, any time I reassess him, he looks just the same. His smarts were all street smarts. He never stops looking like a really bad writer. Also looking like a really bad actor, every time he insists on playing serious roles. It does leave a bad taste, the way everybody treats that ambition (surely a harmless one) as fair game. There's a collection of Augustan commentary on his performance of Richard in his "own" Richard III in the Biographical Dictionary: "When he makes love to Lady Anne, he looks like a pickpocket, with his shrugs and grimaces, that has more design on her purse than on her heart" (Grub Street Journal, 1734). He played Richard with "the distorted heavings of an unjointed caterpillar" (Aaron Hill, 1734). "He screamed through four acts withour dignity or decency" (The Laureat, 1740). Everyone's a funny guy. Even the Bibliographical Dictionary itself takes un-encyclopedic pokes at his plays: "His next play was Xerxes, a work in which Christopher Rich sensibly expressed no interest". The Dictionary's whole take is that every success Cibber ever had was due to his major trait of opportunism, especially his business success. Well, it's true, I guess. The way he sucked up to Christopher Rich and got himself made "advisor" and then "sharer" is disgusting, one has to agree. There are plenty of digs at it in documents from the relevant time, 1702—04, so scoffing at Cibber is no invention of Pope's. No actor colleague he ever had seems to have liked or tolerated him.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 17:45, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ok. At the same time, he must have been ingratiating. We have Tonson saying that he benefits from the conversation of others, which is the best. We know that he was an intimate of Pope's and the other Scriblerians, at least enough to have pulled Pope off a prostitute, when he was about to committ "without armor." He had to have been a lively speaker and a good wheedler to have even been able to suck up to Rich. After all, Rich would have had a lot of folks sucking up to him. Furthermore, for him to have managed the difficult egos of Betterton and Barry (whom Gould pissed off) would take some work.
What I was getting at, though, is that if you give me free reign, I'm afraid that I'm going to put in too much. E-mail me, if you want some resections. I'm concerned that you and I will know that what I'm doing is fair but that eventual FAC voters will be puzzled, and casual readers (who haven't read Dunciad or Dunciad) will wonder why more than half the article is dedicated to showing what a pipsqueak he was. Geogre 01:52, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Gee, if getting pissed off by Gould is a criterion of a difficult ego, there must have been a lot of difficult egos about. Betterton was a pretty diplomatic and easy-going guy, I think. (I don't have much sense of what Barry or Bracegirdle were like.) But never mind about that, our Kålly was indeed an excellent wheedler and handled Rich very well. Rich always preferred to think he could just order people about, and C did a job on him, combining wheedling with implicit threats of removing his valuable contributions, actually removing himself bodily over to Betterton & Barry at one point, purely in order to put pressure on Rich to appreciate him more. But C's problem was always with his peers being pissed off by him wheedling superiors. He recalls quite cheerfully in the Apology that all the other kids hated him at school because he was such a suckup! He seems to regard it as some sort of interesting fact that he's a suckup, he has no thought of denying it, it's just the way he happens to be, and other people just happen to not like it, all very interesting, none of it a problem. 'Strordinary. Me give you free rein? Don't be silly, now, the rein's so free it's dragging on the ground. (As for the reign, let's be co-monarchs! I'm not cricizing your spelling, I know they're both used!) I agree that it's better to put lots of stuff in and then cut back later, that's why I've put some imbecilic stuff into the other half of Kåli as it's occurred to me. But if you're worried about the article not being appropriate for readers or other editors in the meantime, do you think it might be more comfortable to keep it in a user subpage for a while? I have various WIP pages already. (Please don't think I mean to interfere with your methods, but that could also be a possibility for the Dunciad, if you'd like it to be.) But just like you, I'm a bit worried about the whole being incoherent. We couldn't FAC it without more of a master plan, I guess. Anyway, you're needed at the Dunciad, I absolutely don't want to distract you from that. Focus, Geogre! You do know that The Dunciad is gold and Kålli is lead, right? Right?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 02:45, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Gould pissed off Barry more than Betterton, apparently, and it had to do, again apparently, with not being enough of a butt kisser, though we only have a partial version of Gould's side of that. The impression I get is that in person Gould was shockingly polite, so no telling what it was about. Betterton forgave Gould. Barry didn't. Again, forgave him for whatever it was.
As for Cibber and Dunciad, you have the materials for a biography of the man, and I'll have some excruciating detail on his literary reputation. The trick will be to add no more than one paragraph from the Four Book and then get out. As for Dunciad, I'll go ahead and draft in public. It's not like the page has gotten even one visitor since I began it (well, the people who wander by to put on templates and categories hit it), so if it has a few tumors at present, they can be lopped off later. The only criticism I got on the Tale article was that there wasn't any flavor for the contents. I may give too much flavor for Dunciad, but I can do something about that after the fact. (Besides, if the goof troop can't help but write articles about single jokes from their favorite TV shows, then how can I cut the hilarious bookseller race in Book II?) It may not be an FA when I'm done, but I don't mind accidentally giving people some of the finest satirical verse in history. Geogre 13:32, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Aphra
Yeah, the no sex is a problem! whole load or problems on poor old Reggie though, if you ask me, seems to be massive arguments and angry editing. Thank Goodness it never gets like that over here! I shall withold my vote to see what happens next. I started Architecture of the United Kingdom, as you saw, full of entheusiasm, because Graham started it as a red link, but I've rather lost my way and interest, think I'll go back to proper Italian buildings for a while, trouble is people who have all been on their summer holidays to Italia always know best because their badly translated cheap guide books have muddled things up, I think I'll call myself 'Gary the Guide' and they might beleive me then. Perhaps I'll go on the Italian Wiki instead, but they are all so young over there, my son and his friends included. Had the anticipated bad day at work yesterday, and this morning which is a sod. I'm going to stop being an Anglophile, that will serve them right. Take care Giano 16:49, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sannolikt inte en smula god begreppen , Jag har en problem med utländsk. Arrivederci Giano 20:53, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ich denke das ist nicht verleicht was Ich habt lust zu sagen. In der schule mein Detsch war nicht so gut wie mein English, quelle suprise! Framåtriktad vi gå Giano 21:00, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
God natt , sova brunn Giano 22:18, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Dunce the second rules like Dunce the First
In the US, he certainly does. See what's going on at my Dunciad some time. There is no doubt whatsoever that I'm going into too much detail. How bad do you think it is? (It's very, very, very much in process.) Geogre 02:20, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
My summary of Book II is done. It's far too long, but how can I deprive people who haven't read the poem of the joys of the p*ssing contest, the muck diving, and the braying? (Always have liked the heroic games sections in both versions better than the other books...except for the apocalypse of Book IV.) Geogre 19:35, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Babel
Ok, so I don't speak it like a native! Giano 07:09, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Modernist poetry
Hi
Thanks for the kind words. I hope it will be OK when finished. Some passing editor linked poetic and diction in that way people have of linking every noun regardless. I may create a poetic diction stub later today, if time allows.
You're quite right about the Lyrical Ballads: I suppose the idea was that Swinbourne, for example, had drifted somewhat from the purity of that position. But Pound learned a lot from Browning and Bunting loved Wordsworth, for example. I may try to work some of this in. Filiocht 08:21, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks also for the improvements, which I hadn't noticed before. I've done as much as I can with it now, apart from a quick proofread later. It's over 4,000 words; probably too long for some, but I like to think as full an overview as a general encyclopaedia needs. I'd appreciate any feedback you have. Filiocht 11:57, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
You have a very stereotyped view of my homeland, we are a delightful race, and ankle bracelets are considered a little,how can I put this - downmarket, whatever the circumstances or occasion! Giano 14:14, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Denken sie die seite uber ist gut genug für FA? Und warum, konne ich fragen, haben sie in der mitte von die Literaturpunkt nicht aus Enid Blyton geschreibt? Ich, und auch alle meine schöne kinder, denke sie war sehr gut. Ich bin auf der meinung diese seit hast ein lanhe weg zu gehen bevor es ist ein FA. Auf wiedersehen Giano 17:34, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC) PS Haben sie Culture of Italy gesehen, jetz, ist das ganz wunderbar und interessant.
Thanks for proposing Palladian atchitecture, it has now made it to FA which is great and without any controversy which is amazing. Culture of Italy is a crap stub, and I've asked the editor for his source as I don't beleive it can possibly be true, I would love to have loads more children! So it can't be true. I could rewrite tha page but with such a cultured nation where would one start, I like to think of Italy as the cradle of civilization, the fountain of culture and education, in fact I think I will go and put that on the page, it may inspire 'les autres'. Take care Giano 13:35, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Salve, e grazie. C'è qualcuno che parla inglese? Ciao Giano 22:00, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Why don't you spend your time doing something useful like expanding Culture of Italy, writing about one of our many great literary giants. the Wikipedia is very dull at the moment, I am at a loss, and can't find anything that interests me much at the moment. Giano 22:20, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Lamborgheni, Ferrari is nothern europe totally devoid of style and panache? Giano 22:30, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Actually, God is Italian. why are all 'deux cheveaux' drivrers vegetarian? - because if they hits a rabbit (or an elk), the rabbit says "whats that irritating buzzing in my ear" Ho ho ho ho - that's really funny ho ho.
Anyway, bollocks! to Shakespeare my new Automobiles of Italy will generate far more interest.
Giano 07:28, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Tin cans
I added a little to your Shakespeare's Reputation, but I did it quickly. Feel free to revert it (I won't get offended) or rewrite it. My brain is playing tricks on me. Not only do I know that Drury Lane and ... and... Lincoln's Inn Fields had rival productions of Shakespeare twice at the same time (same play, even), but I wrote it on Wikipedia. Now I can't think of where to referece it. The quadrupling performance is also a true thing, but it goes back to the days of lore and an article I read in a learned press, the which I thought very interesting and never wrote a citation of. Geogre 20:33, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Culture of Italy sure needs something. I'm not really sure about these 'Culture of..' pages I think the individual art and drama pages fullfil the need quite well as it is. On the Culture of United Kingdom page someone has written "main article Architecture of United Kingdom", which at the time was a red link itself, so perhaps these pages would be better just a list of links. (why are those links red, has someone VFD'd them already?)
Thanks for you complement on my new boy's page, I expect someone will nominate it for featured article very shortly! No response at all about the diminishing Italian family, I hope the Pope doesn't edit,I can't immagine him being very pleased at that news. Had dinner last night with some Swedish people, they had been married 20 years and had three children! Just off to have a look at your Shakespeare, is he the one with the girl who threw herself of the balcony? because Romeo was being carved up by a money lender, because he was being blackmailed by Lady McDuff? Giano 12:41, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Shakespeare's rep and pictures
It's all wonderful. The Reynolds portrait of Johnson is great too--I added it to the Johnson article. I seem to be seeing Dryden's pale mug everywhere, though--think he merits being the only non-W.S. person on the Shakespeare article? PRIIS 04:51, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, and right, why have one of those "after Reynolds" engravings or whatever they are, when you can have a color scan of the real thing—I had put it on my list to go add it to Samuel Johnson myself, thanks for taking care of it. Hey, how about the other two images on Samuel Johnson being 1) his house the way it looks today 2)the annual re-enactment of his wedding? You'd think Boswell or Mrs Thrale might get a look in, but we don't want to put readers off with anything highbrow, I suppose (sole illustration of "literature" section in Culture of the United Kingdom: a big-ass photo of Jeremy Irons playing Sherlock Holmes). I guess I figured Dryden merited it for having something nice to say in 1668, after the article claimed the Romantics discovered Shakespeare. These were subrational figurings, though, since the first thing I did was overwrite that same Romantic myth, it's not there any more. Anyway, please replace D with someone better, or see him as a placeholder and avert your eyes—the painter must have really hated him—I'm thinking of maybe Coleridge or Carlyle. Got any ideas? (What I'd really like is an outtake from the happy-ending King Lear, showing Edgar and Cordelia getting married or something, but can't find one.) Oh, hey, PRIIS, the first sentences, about the Renaissance, are kind of archeological remains, it would be great if you'd replace them with something to the point. I'd appreciate it.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 09:03, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
As for the Johnson, the wedding reinactment just seems goofy to me--that article still needs work, but lots of people have things to say about the Great Cham, so I'm afraid it will always be in flux. A Boswell shot is not a bad idea, though. As for Dryden, maybe the problem is the article just needs more pictures, like a title-page from a quarto of Hamlet or the First Folio or something to balance things out more. I'm no expert on Shakespeare, but I thought about what you asked about the reputation, and I'm adding a couple sentences. I'm sure I'm missing something, though. PRIIS 15:30, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
A new user's opinion on biographies
Since you have edited so many biographical articles, some even to featured status, you may want to have a look at the talk page of this new user: User_talk:Maxx. He/she has some ideas regarding a standard for biographies. Maybe you would care to comment. — David Remahl 14:20, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
And that goes for Geogre too. I won't post separately on his page, as I'm pretty sure he'll read Bishonen's :-). — David Remahl 14:21, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I agree with what you saiding completely! Hmmmmm! Giano 19:02, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
2nd War of the Theaters
Hear the words of Pope: Dunciad Variorum 1732:
"A matchless youth: His nod these worlds controuls,
Wings the red lightning, and the thunder rolls.
Angel of Dulness, sent to scatter round
Her magic charms o'er all unclassic ground:
Yon stars, yon suns, he rears at pleasure higher,
Illumes their light, and sets their flames on fire.
Alike their labours, and alike their praise." (III 250-268)
Booth was one of the other patentees of Drury Lane. Cibber had done a show where he made a pantomime with a dragon, which he rode. Rich you know about. Further, Pope records a particularly offensive play called Dr. Faustus, which was performed by both houses, earlier. He says that they contended with each other to produce big effects: dragons, 10-horned fiends, giants, Hell rising, Heaven on earth, and a huge fire (and, of course, Tibbald had written fires into his plays). Geogre 22:44, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
By the way, Pope also attacks Theophilus Cibber as an impertinent dunce. I had completely missed that in my previous readings, and this is in 1727-8. Geogre 22:56, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
3rd War of the Theatres
Check out the scandalous Theophilus here! Btw, I've just realized that your War of the theatres was the third, i. e. mine in the 1690s was the second. Oops. :-( I'm pretty sure I glimpsed the phrase WoT, capitalized and all, applied to Elizabethan theatre in some article recently, though I can't seem to find it again.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 23:39, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Wow! What was that movie with Robert Redford, where he was a millionaire who'd pay to sleep with some dude's wife? Theo was just getting a jump on it, I guess. I tried to gracefully merge in the single line from Dunciad into that article. You can remove it or move it, if you please. It's just that it seems like being mentioned in the poem is not trivial -- though it doesn't hold a candle to the blackmail sex story. Geogre 04:43, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
That section is new today, eh? I didn't know. I'm going to keep my eyes peeled for him in the 4 book Dunciad, since the first of those things happened between the publication of Variorum and the 4th book, and between the change of kings from Tibbald to Cibber. (In the Variorum, by the way, there is a reference to homosexuality, which surprised me a little. As with Cleland's Fanny Hill, it's spoken of as something that won't be spoken of.) It sounds like Theo is ripe for a modern, salacious biography. Geogre 15:02, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Dunces again
Well, I finally finished my account of the 3 Book Dunciad. If I do as much on the 4 book, or even just fill out the sections remaining that I have headers for, it's going to be an 80 kb article before pictures.
Too much detail.
Still, my reaction on really reading the poem for the first time in years is "Wow." Wow. It has everything in it. It's a 1,012 line A Tale of a Tub. Some amazing stuff. If it weren't so topical and scatological, more folks would recognize it as one of the top 3-4 poems in the language. Geogre 04:35, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Modernism
Hi, I've been away for a few days, hence the silence. Thanks for your very kind words on WP:FA. Filiocht 08:35, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks
I had been thinking of leaving it for a week to get in all thoughts then give my considered response before contacting contributors Maxx 17:20, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Right. I thought that was probably it, but FWIW, I just doubt that it'll work too well that way. I quite agree that it ought to, but it's not my experience of Wikipedia dynamics that it does. It's your initiative, and even your talk page: if contributors come there and see three longish comments that you haven't responded to, I don't think they're so likely to post their own thoughts, but rather to shrug and leave. A week is a very long time in Wikipedia time.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 19:26, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Shake-y reputation
Ok, from Dunciad B (1743), note to I 134:
"Ben Johnson (sic) honestly wished he had blotted a thousand (lines); and Shakespear would certainly have wished the same, if he had lived to see those alterations in his works, which, not the Actors only (and especially the daring Hero of this poem) have made on the Stage, but the presumptuous Critics of our days in their Editions.
by Pope.
On another matter, of Colley, a note to line 2: Colley has "a Son so exactly like him, in his poetical, theatrical, political, and moral Capacities." I don't doubt the "moral" is just the first hint of what Pope was probably not going to talk about. Geogre 22:14, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Citation
You were talking to me about the wig in a sedan chair. Here's your source:
"The first visible cause of the passion of the Town for our Hero, was a fair flaxen full bottom’d Periwig, which, he tells us, he wore in his first play of the Fool in fashion (1696). It attracted, in a particular manner, the Friendship of Col. Brett, who wanted to purchase it. ‘Whatever contempt (says he) Philosophers may have for a fine Periwig, my friend, who was not to despise the world but to live in it, knew very well that so material an article of dress upon the head of a man of sense, if it became him, could never fail of drawing to him a more partial Regard and Benevolence, than could possibly be hoped for in an ill-made one. This perhaps, may soften the grave censusre which so youthful a purchase might otherwise have laid upon him. In a word, he made his attack upon this Periwig, as your young fellows generally do upon a lady of pleasure, first by a few familiar praises of her person, and then a civil enquiry into the price of it; and we finished our bargain that night over a bottle.’ See Life, octavo p. 303. This remarkable Periwig usually made its entrance upon the stage in a sedan, brought in by two chairmen, with infinite approbation of the audience." Dunciad B, Note, line 167.
I don't know Fool in fashion of 1696, but that's probably the source of the anecdote. Geogre 18:15, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sure is, thanks very much. The play is Love's Last Shift, Kålli liked to talk about it under this unofficial title that refers to the part he played, fancy that, who'd have thought it. So should I refer to the John Butt or the Aubrey Williams ed?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 19:10, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I got it from the Butt, but it's just a note by Pope, so the citation is to him, any edition you prefer, of the 1743 Dunciad, note to book I, line 167.
More: From another note by Pope, this time to line I. 228: '"It may be observable, that my muse and my spouse were equally prolific; that the one was seldom the mother of a Child, but in the same year the other made me the father of a Play. I think we had a dozen of each sort between us; of both which kinds some died in their Infancy, &c. Life of C. C. p. 217. 8vo edit."' Now there's some filial love for you. Also from the notes, I find that Cibber was meant to take orders by his father. Granted, Pope selects only passages that show CC in a bad light, but things like this show him in a very bad light. Geogre 20:22, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Yeah. That's not Pope talking, he's quoting the Apology (as in most of the Dunciad periwig passage, just not in the actual mention of the sedan chair). About the parental wishes, I guess you haven't looked at my additions to Colley Cibber recently?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 20:36, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Right: I messed up the quotation marks above. Also, right after I wrote it I noticed that you had put the information in already, so I had nothing to add. Ok, I've been back to the CC article. In the "Later attacks" section, I saw where the first stuff I'd put in, about the prostitute anecdote, had been kind of REMmed out. That's fine. However, I figured a way to make it fit a bit better. I expanded on the theme of "why the Apology offended people" by giving the "died in their infancy" thing I quoted above as an illustration (and an apt one, since Pope picks it out, thereby ensuring that people who read either Pope or Cibber would hit it) and abbreviated the prostitute thing and put in the boast of having a "whore" at 80. You can cut stuff out if you like. I'm putting in rather too much to begin with. I do think, though, that some discussion of the offensiveness of the Apology in its own right would be a good thing for the Later Attacks section. Since I'm not going to read the Apology any time soon, I'll let Pope pick out the abuses for me. Geogre 21:45, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I only invisibled the brothel anecdote in one place because it was mentioned in two different places, please see edit line.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 22:24, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
It would have been perfectly fine to remove it altogether, as it wasn't well documented, but I wasn't complaining in any case. Also, I didn't know that I'd put it in twice. Since I'd been adding to the CC article haphazardly, I've no doubt that I lost track of the whole. Like I said, it was totally fine. If it's in twice, I probably need to scale back the first ref and leave the second so that there can be a "what was it about the Apology that set people off," or make the second only an allusion. Geogre 00:38, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
S. Reput.
Did you notice an anonymous editor added a lot of very good info on Shak's contemporary reputation in the Shakespeare article? You could probably use it for the S's Reputation article, too. PRiis 16:04, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Just grammar
Went through the S. Rep. just with minor grammar. However, I did insert one new thing. I had written that the sexual slang and puns were back in to stay. Well, that wasn't quite true, and I knew it. The Family Shakespeare and Shakespeare for Children were out there on the horizon. Neither of them quite removed this stuff as an avowed "edition of Shakespeare": Both said quite clearly that they were altered editions in their titles and didn't try to fool anyone into thinking that what they were doing was Shakespeare. However, I thought that a reader might well know about Bowdler and have a question raised in her mind, so I put in the "(with a few exceptions)" in there. I figured that headed off a later change by someone on a campaign to list every expurgation who'd change the article. Geogre 15:58, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Geogre, it's fine, honestly, your edit summary will do me nicely, you don't have to do all this. (If it was me, it would take me half an hour to type that message.) Thanks for the Bowdler edit.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 19:09, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the great copy edit and additions, I've just reverted one tiny bit from the ist caption, as I thought it made the lead to short. Check out the plan, all my own work with a felt pen and ruler, and a bit of help from the computer. Nice work at Shakespeare's reputation, I did get the wrong lamb, this is the one I was thinking of Lady Caroline Lamb much for fun, and quite a literary figure too it seems, I'm suprised you've not done her reputation as well. Thanks a milion.... Giano
Can you do me a favour , got to FA vote page, Hapsburgs in Spain, or something like that, (you don't have to vote its not your subject) and give address for the archive on John Vanbrugh (I can't find it) about why long pages don't have to be split up, which someone has sugested. Hurrying off to a plane, speak when I get there Giano 19:30, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Bishonen, thank you for the work you put into Bernard Williams. You have definitely improved it, and I do prefer the way you've written the references. I also prefer your longer paragraphs. Mine were so short I felt they were becoming a little breathless. The only thing I changed back was that Williams was the Knightsbridge Professor of Philosophy, not Moral Philosophy. Interestingly, the Encyclopaedia Britannica gets this wrong. For example, in their article on Richard Braithwaite, they call him Knightsbridge Prof. of Moral Philosophy [1], which is incorrect, unless there are two Knightsbridge Chairs, but to my knowledge there is only one, as seems to be confirmed by the Cambridge Philosophy Faculty website. [2] Anyway, thank you again for your help and kind words, and for your support, which is much appreciated. Slim 03:10, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the kind words. Yes, Modernist poetry in English is a personal favourite, although I retain a soft spot for Irish theatre. Someone wants an old article of mine, American poetry, defeatured partly because I used 'writer;y' and 'professionalisation' in it. Filiocht 08:22, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
By the way, I didn't get to read up much on Bill's rep, but I will, I will, I promise. Filiocht 09:55, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
C'est moi
Hi, having some problems with a new computer and editing and emailing, the security settings are set too high, and I'm too stupid to alter them, so have to wait for some-one younger and wiser, to do it for me, maybe 10 days ! F.... Giano 21:39, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I have expanded the terse genealogical note into a skeleton recognizable as Lord Burlington, for your entertainment and User:Giano's. The list of works is a shaky scaffolding --Wetman 04:31, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I give up, by the time they've finished it won't even be a featured article, what with the "long forgotten" Vitruvius "setting forth" his rules (I wonder where he set them forth and where they went; someone has now just put a paragraph back where I had it originally, and is clapping themselves on the back for being so clever. It will end up that there happens to be a wonderful style of architecture, and guess what they called it Palladian just to flatter some half witted old architect who died before the style was dreamed up. Giano 19:13, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
immensly cheered by edits and comments on talk page of today's main article, at least no one said PA was "garbage", "porn"," unsuitable for children", or "should not be on the front page". Giano 08:51, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
As a matter of fact it has taught me no new words at all, as I merely read the talk page and counted the edits, I would not dream of reading such a load of drivel. I am very open and broad minded but one look at the pictures was a enough to switch me right off. Anyhow, I can barely work the computer let alone play games on it; and I though an anemone was a thing that lived in the sea Giano 15:54, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Cibber done
I'm done adding Popish material to Cibber. You can cut, burn, add, rearrange, or ignore any and all of it, as you wish. I'm not sure that all of "Cibber as Dunce" works with a good flow or that it doesn't show the fact that it was added in sections weeks apart, but Cibber is pretty much out of the Dunciad now, so I don't anticipate running across more to say about Pope's attack on him than I've already put in. (With The Dunciad, I'm putting in the summary of Book IV now. I quoted at length the great attack on Italian opera there.) Geogre 20:37, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Vandals
Thanks for the reversion, PA had been vandalsied all day one way and another, it will be great to see all mention of it off the front page Giano 18:04, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Paragraphs
Hi Bishonen, just a note to say thanks for your note on my Talk page and sorry for not responding sooner, but I've been swamped. I'm interested in what you wrote about the rhythm of paragraphs, and the need for a mix of different lengths. I'm about to start preparing a second article for a featured article nomination, and I'd like to get it right this time, so any more views or information about paragraphs lengths would be appreciated. I won't nominate the second one until Bernard Williams is dealt with, because I read the note about not submitting more than one per person.
I found the nomination process extremely helpful, by the way. It has served to focus my mind on what makes a good, as opposed to an adequate, article; and I now find myself going around inserting comments on Talk pages about the need for references. :-) Seriously, there is nowhere near enough referencing in Wikipedia. We could be making most of it up for all the readers know.
Has anyone ever considered establishing a permanent group of Featured Article judges, who would judge all nominations? I was wondering because I noticed that Special Relativity has been nominated. Two of the objectors (who referred the article for peer review) were anonymous IP addresses, one of them single-use. It seems wrong that a Featured Article can be judged by people with no expertise and no editing history. It would be great to have an established group consisting of, say, a physicist, biologist, chemist, economist, historian, critical thinker/philosopher, writer etc. I know that Maurreen has been involved in the encyclopedic standards debate, and specifically Wikipedia 1.0. I felt that, rather than set up a new editing structure, the existing Featured Article structure could be strengthened, and more editors could be encouraged to raise their articles to that standard. I don't know whether you have any thoughts about that. Anyway, it was nice dealing with you over dear Bernard, and thanks again for the improvements you made. Slim 19:33, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Poetic diction
Here's a stub you might like to help expand: Poetic diction. Filiocht 14:15, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
Hallo!
Hallo Bishonen:-) I am likeing your literacy pages very much, especially what you say on Christmas, my Englisch is not good, so can you write how hoppy we all are in poland at this merry time. Loving you Stanislas 20:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Tonson
I found the book:
Lynch, Kathleen M. Jacob Tonson Kit-Cat Publisher. Knoxville: U. Tennessee Press, 1971.
The writing isn't deathless prose, but Kathleen Lynch is one of the famous of a previous generation, and the scholarship is solid, even if the insights aren't really deep. Geogre 22:48, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Prose Edda?
Were you the one to add the bit about the Prose Edda? I've got to ask, because I've read the thing a couple of times, and, unless I have an abridged version, I honestly don't remember any poetics in it at all. (Shelley in Prometheus Unbound, but it's poetic diction in a different sense. He pushes elevated diction that's laden with terms from philosophy and esoteric sciences. It's not antique, but it's definitely elevated, but elevated like Milton -- highly Latinate and very unusual. Fine to have it out, but I was trying to get at the way that wispy language crept back into Romantic poetry. Not in Byron. I also think WW's dialect is precious, but that's another matter.) Anyway, I want someone to reassure me that the bit about the Prose Edda is accurate. Geogre 22:58, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sure, that was me. I read it on the Internet, so it's gotta be true! No, seriously, I have no idea. I was going by this page, also somewhat by Wiki article Younger Edda. Do change it, or remove it, if you've actually read the thing and it's not about poetic diction. At the same time, I suppose, if you did have an abridged version, it's only too likely that it would keep the examples, as interesting, and cut the actual poetics, as boring. Did you see I put up Poetic diction for Did you know...? P.S. Too much spam on my page! :-( [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 23:39, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You should see the latest on my talk page. User:WD-40 thinks that I "banned his school." I've banned two vandals for 24 hours, as is appropriate, and I can just imagine one chin-drooling kid after another using the same computer lab, and therefore the same IP. The Prose Edda I've got doesn't claim to be abridged (U. Cal. P.). It contains the Fooling of Gylfe and the tales of Thor and Utgard Loki. The beginning is an explanation of myth, but there's no poetics in it. That might be the case in The Younger Edda, but not the Prose Edda, that I know of (if they're different). Geogre 01:02, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Interesting. I've gone to the links you used. I guess I was reading an abridgement (and it's the same Press as the link you have, but the cover is much different...which doesn't mean anything). There were references in it to the Hattal, but the Hattal wasn't included, so I must have had an abridgement. All I can say is that Snorri talks about how myth was developed, and he quotes from the older edda, but he nowhere explains prosody or poetics in what I have. I might modify, slightly or expand, what you have in the poetic diction article just to indicate kennings and gnomic verse as part of p.d. Geogre 01:07, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Ok, I put Snorri in a sort of Germanic languages pdiddy, which seems natural in the prehistory section. I also started up some references. I don't know if it's worth putting in Milton from the big black book of Milton, or Wordsworth, etc., but I had mentioned Fussell, and he's not all over the place, so I figured it would be right to list the book in question. Once I did that, I tossed in some others. Geogre 04:59, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Itsy-bitsy correction and one change to the Snorri last sentence. Great expansion to it -- makes sense. I just wanted to weasel-word the last sentence a little. In the introduction to Prose Edda he speaks pretty derisively of the pagan literature, but he is worried that no one will be able to read it. I don't think he's against it, but I think he's probably kind of "conflicted" (ick) about it, so I just wanted to weaken the conclusion slightly. Feel free to change it back, if you'd like. I also did a teeny bit more for the 18th c. I wish I knew which Spectators talk about it so that I could quote or refer to the issue numbers. Geogre 16:30, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Well, I think a weasel "some say" without any source or reference is going to get the reader more worried about POV rather than less.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 17:56, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
It needs a source, then. I, at least, would challenge the statement without qualification for a lot of reasons. Geogre 21:34, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Yes, it needs a source, that's what I meant.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 07:09, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Unbelievable work on Poetic diction, guys. Little did I think so much would happen so quickly. As of the next month or so, I'll be working on The Cantos, reading canto-by-canto, checking the refs, making notes and filling in the article, but I will try to add to PD too. You and Geogre are the kind of people who keep me working here, no matter how much I get pissed off with a lot of what goes on. Filiocht 08:33, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
Licensing message
You can add the {{NoSolicitors}} template to tell people not to solicit your page, for what its worth. With regards to the village pump, that would be a decent idea to do, except that it gets limited viewing. For instance, some users are somewhat inactive, but they still monitor their user pages. For those people (and I don't know who they are before the fact), I must use their talk pages. I apologize if this message upsets you. But I do have to ask people individually if I am to get everyone. Otherwise I might as well not do anything because it wouldn't be worth the effort. Now I could also add this to village pump, but I didn't want to beat the issue dead. – Ram-Man(comment) (talk)[[]] 01:06, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
That's OK, your message wasn't the only one that got me putting a nasty remark at the top of this page (which I hope will work as well as a template would). I can't say I understand how you figure that some of the top 2000 contributors are going to be "somewhat inactive", though.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 01:18, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Actually I've had a number of responses from users who don't work on Wikipedia anymore. They just happened to check their user page and I suppose they figured that since they are no longer with the project, releasing into the public domain would be quite flexible. It was a nice gesture. There are at least a couple dozen users in the top 2000 with notes that they no longer work on Wikipedia or are on an extended WikiVacation. 402 of the top 2000 have not made a single edit in the last 30 days. I'm just hoping they come back one day, see the message and do what the person I described did. – Ram-Man(comment) (talk)[[]] 13:35, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
DYK
I'll have a go at writing a step by step guide to updating the DYK template. In the mean time, you can help out by tracking down new pages (+1000 bytes) with interesting facts to feature. They should be listed under the heading for the day they were created on DYK talk. Happy editing! [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 15:38, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
I've taken a stab at writing the guide. The first version is at [[Template talk:Did you know/Guide. Please tell me what you think. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 16:14, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
The crap-load that wasn't there before you started editing are some extra instructions. There's always people that edit without regarding the guidelines others created. In a sense you've worked with templates before, but you were adding existing ones to pages. By editing Template:Did you know, you are editing a template that is primarily included on the main page which is why you don't need the usual syntax. It's already there. As for new and previous template: previous is what I call the section how it was before the edit. I'll see if I can fix the guide to make it clearer. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 17:19, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
(I hope it was clear I meant "crapload" in the nicest possible sense! :-)
Hi Bishonen, you asked what my next featured article nomination would be. I've just put it up. It's called Rat Park: it's not philosophy, but is definitely philosophical. (And definitely not royalty or celebrities.) See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. All criticism is welcome. It has longish paragraphs. And is carefully referenced. :-) Best, Slim 10:44, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit, Bishonen. I'm taking a bit of a beating. Whew . . . Oh well, it's all in the pursuit of quality. :-) Slim 03:36, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Regarding the problem of finding criticism, I've written to everyone I can think of so I'll wait a few more days for replies. I've written to Bruce Alexander too, author of the experiment, but he hasn't replied, which I suppose is not surprising, because I'm basically asking him tell me all the bad stuff about his own methodology. If I don't find published criticism, I'll do as you suggest and will try to summarize the standard view, perhaps using Nestler and Malenka, and will mention changes in brains seen in scans and when addicted rats are dissected. I'll also take on board your point about reductionism and will try to define it in an NPOV way. "Reductionists are people who couldn't care less about your dreams, hopes, aspirations and fears, because you ARE your brain". Tell me honestly now: is that neutral enough? :-)
Regarding photographs, I agree with you completely about the National Parks article which cries out for great illustrations. I wonder whether, apart from the issue of screen size, some editors equate "encyclopedic" with "boring." Anything dull, dry, facts only, no pics, no opinions, no life, no good writing is, for them, encyclopedic, and nothing else can fit that definition. I accept that it's a challenge to write an interesting, lively article and still make sure it's NPOV, but it's not impossible and it should be the aim, in my view, of Wikipedia. I feel we can't (and shouldn't want to) become a free version of the Encylopedia Britannica, which can be deadly dull, often quite unhelpful, and surprisingly error-prone. Anyway, I doth protesteth too much, perhaps. Slim 21:41, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
1802?
On the Poetic diction a question: Preface to Lyrical Ballads 1802? Several places, the article text says that WW challenged p.d. in 1802, and yet it says "Second edition of Lyrical Ballads in 1798." Was there a revision to the "Preface" in 1802? I always learned it as 1798, but this may be one of those obvious facts that I just don't know. Geogre 02:51, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The 1798 ed only had a brief Advertisement, just with something like "some may find these productions too 'low'", then there was an 1800 ed which had a real preface, but the 1802 ed has substantial and relevant prefatorial additions and is the one usually quoted, and the one I need to quote. (So 1802 is right, but the 1802 is the third edition, not the second, I didn't know about the 1800 ed.) It had important additions inside the Preface plus an appendix specifically on poetic diction. I was trying to say in the Lead that Lyrical Ballads itself was published in 1798—it's the famous year, gotta say it somewhere—not that the second edition was in 1798, but I see that's what it came out looking like, I'll change it. Check out this full publication history, which seems to have been a nightmare for all concerned. There are several versions of all the editions. :-( --[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen(talk)]] 08:56, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I found this article in DYK and I think this article should reside at wikiquote in quotes by or about William Shakespeare. How would you feel about transwikifying it and leaving a {{wikiquote}} template in the William Shakespeare article to point to the quotes? [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 12:28, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
No problem at all. They're much better merged in his reputation article than one of their own. And I agree that merging a timeline with random quotes might cause problems. Thanks for the quick reply :-) [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 13:26, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Wait... is it this?
It just came to me--could it be De Witt's drawing of the Swan you're thinking of?
The expansion on the play is most welcome. I've never read the play, but I know the facts about it that everyone learns when they study Behn. Geogre 02:46, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I'm glad you like the idea. It's certainly possible for style sheets to control the size of elements on the page (I have seen numerous other sites with such switches).
I'm thinking about how to propose this idea in a way that will garner enough support to overcome the objections that will surely come up.
I will put yet another proposal together for the Software polls section, but someone with some "juice" around here will have to be convinced of the merits of this idea, before it makes sense to post the proposal. I've encountered a number of good Administrators who constantly point out that many people are working to improve the workings of Wikipedia, but this project is so big, that the ratio of naysayers to agents of change makes any improvements proceed at a glacial pace.
However, there is a smaller project called Wikinews that seems to be much more open to actively changing and improving itself, so let me see if I have better luck over there first. If we can show style sheets with an element size selector working on Wikinews first, it will be more difficult for any of the naysayers over on this project to block the same feature on Wikipedia.
One starts nice and pleasant and reasonable!Giano 13:46, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
No, I was attempting to leave a message on the page of a mutual 'friend' Giano 14:05, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
sorry, that's ambiguous David's friend! - (<- This comment was also posted by Giano)
Due to Giano's post appearing immediately below my last post, just a short time later, and given that Giano had just finished a little exchange with me on a completely unrelated page, and that my name is also "David", I somehow thought that he was posting about our little exchange here on this talk page. I was mistaken, as Giano has now explained on my user talk page that he really was talking about a friend of a troll who was posting on Chmod007's talk page, who amazingly enough, also had the name "David", and that he posts on your talk page all the time, and he wasn't referring to me at all.
I apologize for wasting your time over this matter, but if you are curious, I posted quotes on my user talk page of what Giano had posted, and your reaction, in the order in which they appeared, in case the timeline of events was unclear.
Again, my apology for wasting your time over such a trite matter. — DV 21:48, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your helpful e-mail. I sent you a reply by e-mail. — DV 04:04, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
re: Christmas
I've been trying to get the "Christmas" article up to speed for a re-nom in time for this year's holiday. I thought the stuff in question was interesting, and fwiw well-written, but too "out there" for an encyclopedia article about Christmas. I guess I'm more of a technical than a creative writer. I see now what you meant re my deleting what made it clever ... the parallellism where you had repeated for effect that phrase with "traditionally" in it ... but without the context of some threat of food poisoning ... which context no one I asked understood ... it seemed over the top for this article. Last month, when I was eagerly buffing up "Bicycle" for FAC, one guy (who eventually pretty much torpedoed the whole thing with (frivolous) objections deleted a misunderstood sentence of mine. I had obliquely criticizing my fellow-Americans for buying inappropriately sporty bicycles for everyday use, and referred in contrast to the "less style-conscious" Europeans, who purchase sensible utility cycles for doing errands and biking around campus. This Brit thought I was dissing his taste, and erased what he called this "wisecrack". I let it slide, since this fellow had not seemed to be one with whom you could deal rationally. Keep up the good work, and "revert" when you see fit.Sfahey 01:24, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
That footnote in footnote thing was what deterred ME. I didn't even want to speculate on what you thought almost happened to YOU. Meryy Xmas. Let's see if the wiki-god puts this on the main page on 12/25 (or 1/6 or whenever the wikipedia Christmas is!). Sfahey 17:32, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thanks for ...
good changes on "Christmas", as opposed to some other guy who is now making unhelpful, but not as of yet destructive, changes. most of those references and virtually all the ext. links, were others'. I was going to "footnote" all of that last section on "theories on the date ...", and backed off because: 1) none of it was mine; 2) some of it had required a lot of research; and 3) i'd have been stuck with trying to figure out what to do with a footnote within a footnote.Sfahey 19:23, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I think between us we finessed the (goofy) changes which snuck into the "lead". Also, you will be amused I am sure by the stuff added by "Miraceti". I think I translated them reasonably. This really is an international effort!Sfahey 20:10, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Zuruck
Any excitement in my absence? Giano 10:38, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Que?....I though life had been quiet all day, is it just this small corner of the universe which is functioning - I had rather been expecting a revert somewhere by now! Giano 17:10, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Norse mythology
No problem, after all, comments on FAC are not final, and you can always edit them if the article, or your opinion of it, changes. I have developed a 'radar' to some extent to these 'pagan pov' things, because the pagan related articles are positively riddled with them. usually they are not too bad, just slightly suggestive, but a Featured Article of course would require a thorough screening. Most of the time it's along the lines of "the fanatical Christians came and destroyed the beautiful aboriginal intact pagan culture", while in reality, of course, it was almost never so clear-cut. There are quite a few of these left in this article, e.g. the suggestion that Iceland was bullied into becoming Christian. dab(ᛏ) 17:21, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've fixed the accidently doubling of the Bibliography which you informed me of. As to the article in general, it seems to me to have a number of gross errors and dubious statements. For example, what text actually states where Asgard was located, outside of the eumheristic locatation in Turkey by Snorri or the identification with Constantinople in Saxo? And a few sentences later, though Asgard, was previously located at the center of the earth disk, we are told that Midgard lies between Asgard and Niflheim, in apparent contradiction. I think the only sources locating Niflheim at all, locate it in the north. We have a statement about the dualism between Jotüns and gods and a later statement that Norse religion had no clear-cut dualism. The identification of Honir with Vili and Ve with Lodur is very dubious. (That one god replaces another in the same story does not necessarily make them identical, for example the Greek Prometheus, Hephaistos, and Typhon are not identical, though they share traits and story motifs.) The statement that Skuld describes the death of Baldur and fall of the gods seems to be from someone's idioysyncratic theory identifying Skuld with the Vala in the Völuspá. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is certainly not an example of lost mythology, other than a few genealogical traditions. There is an overabundance of Tolkienism here. Unless there has been something discovered I am not aware of, an etymological connection between Old English ent and ettin (= Old Norse jötun) is still considered to be very dubious. And it oversimplifies and claims far too much to say that Tolkien based his Middle-earth on Midgard.
I wonder if something like the article Iceland would prove a good model, that is a series of short summary pieces each linking to a fuller discussion.
I do not see any point in distinguishing between "References" and "Further Reading" in a listing, unless "Further reading" means material not so closely connected to the article. I'm a full convert of the MLA school of documentation and the Harvard scientific style of documentation in which one uses in-text references, usually last name of the author, sometimes year date, and often page number of other indication of location in the work, said work so referenced to found in the Bibliography. This is far easier on the reader than end notes or footnotes and is the recommended style at Wikipedia:Cite sources. That all works in a Bibliography are not referenced is quite acceptable and quite normal.
The Bibliography was mostly added by myself, basically comprising (arguably) the most important reasonably available secondary works in English, one German work that is the current accepted authoritative standard work, and others not so important but reasonably available, whether on the web or in book form or both. I don't think it should be necessary to especially document secondary material that is general knowledge and that can be found in almost every one of the General Secondary Works. Also, if each section of the Norse Mythology article links to a more complete article, that is where fuller documentation would go. In some ways Norse Mythology should be a summary article, summarizing what is more fully expounded and documented elsewhere.
But I agree that some documentation is needed in the article as it stands.
As to citations from primary works, mostly, for Norse mythology, these should have their own articles and many now do. Accordingly, one would do citation by links, that is link to the article on a particular eddic poem or to the Skáldskaparmál and so forth. My plan was to rework the articles on the Eddas, give them more complete Bibligraphies: reasonably full listings of editions of the Old Norse texts and of most English translations, whether on web or only hard published. I have not got there yet. I may try shortly.
Essentially, the Primary Sources section would continue to contain only internal links: a link to the main article on Snorri's Edda, a link to the article on the Poetic Edda, but also an additional link to the article on Gesta Danorum and yet another link to an unwritten article on Fornaldarsögur. Each of these articles would have its own Bibliography. (There might be a few other links also. I suppose Faroese material should be considered Norse, and there ought to be a link to Faroese sources which would contain, among other information, a bibliography to sources for Faroese primary texts and translations. And there are probably other individual works that might be linked to, perhaps dividing the Primary Sources section into Major and Minor.)
There should probably also be an article or section on modern novelistic and fictional use of Norse mythology (beginning with Wagner?). I know enough to at least start one, but have other things I'd rather be doing here, when I have the time.
You can copy my post anywhere. I think the Norse Mythology article is far from being a good article at the moment. But when I have time and inclination to write in that area, I generally prefer to work on detailed articles covering a single aspect of Norse mythology and try to get that right, rather than attempt the impossible task of surveying the entire field in a short article. So I'm not the person to dive in and rework it. And I prefer generally working with the primary sources, often throwing out material that has crept in from secondary sources. In respect to mythology and legend, if you can't find it in a primary source, it didn't happen (and anything if that kind must be referenced as speculation if included).
I have nothing particularly against "references used" and "further reading" when that fits, except how do you distinguish if you and other editors together have read all the works listed? To take an example from Norse mythology, that Odin has two brothers named Vili and Ve is something mentioned in some primary texts (both Eddas) and in every secondary text mentioned. So all the works can be listed as references to this.
Anyone insisting that sections called References used and Further readingmust appear in every feature-level article, should be requested to first obtain consensus from Wikipedia members to include this as a requirement in Wikipedia:Cite sources. Until that is done, and I doubt such an attempt would succeed, this seems to me to be an advocacy attempt to impose one particular style of reference, one that does not especially fit in an encyclopedia. It makes sense that a book on the subject of Norse mythology might contain a Further reading section listing works discussing Scandinavian culture, Scandinavian history, medieval Icelandic history, a survey of theories on mythology in general, and so forth. It makes far less sense in an encyclopedia where those topic are discussed in other articles with their own references, those articles possibly referenced in a See also section.
If North America can have Norad tracking Santa Clause why can't I have my goats blessed? I think that's not fair! Giano 09:08, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Wikibreak ends
Well, I'm back, although not patrolling VfD again yet. That requires more time than I have to spend. I see that you had a delightful visitor to your user page on the 21st. Ah, well...if you don't have anything nice to say, say it loudly, I guess. The site does look like a foreign country, though. (And Verizon's ISP was the fault in the uploading problems I was having, so I'm well shed of them.) Geogre 04:57, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
why do you revert?
Why are you redirecting my page? You never contributed anything to that subject, never discussed anything. What is your motivation? Thanks, Antifinnugor 06:50, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Reply about Finno-Ugric languages
I tried to put my reason for reverting in the edit field, sorry it wasn't clear. I haven't contributed, but I've been following the discussions on Talk:Critique of Finno-Ugric and Uralic language groups and Talk:Finno-Ugric languages, and I've had many interactions on other pages with the linguists I see discussing the conflict there, so I think I have a good basis for understanding what's involved. I understand that you believe strongly in the views you put forward, and that you must feel very beleaguered, with everybody joining forces against you like this. Believe me, I don't take any pleasure in contributing to that feeling. On the other hand, doesn't it tell you something that you're in a minority of one? It's an encyclopedia, it's supposed to be for consensus. The whole Internet's out there, nobody's going to revert you if you start your own website, or contribute to one that already exists for the purpose of propagating your take on the Finno-Ugric language question.
I have a question for you in return. Why do you persist in breaking the rules of this place, after being warned? Nyenyec warns you of the 3 revert rule above on this page, I warned you again in my edit line, and yet you keep right on doing it. Please stop. Nyenec gave you a link for it, here it is again: Wikipedia:Three revert rule. Please go read it if you don't understand the rule.--Bishonen | Talk 09:20, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
No, the minority position does not tell me anything. The people I discuss with, have much less background in the subject, than I do. In Hungary Hungarian people are still suppressed and poor, and have no possibility to internet, therefore am I in minority here. Also 1945-1990 English language was not broadly teached in Hungary, that's the second reason for very small presence.
I believe, that the wikipedia is an important medium, and it should contain the right information, not only the old lies and falsifications. Please read my user page, I summarized the things there, how I see them.
I am not quite sure, that you have the right to rabiately revert, at least morally not. Nyenyec is a quite hostile person, he works, where he can against me and against Hungary and Hungarians, therefore I normally ignore his messages. With his permament espionage and hostility he made already some people angry on the Hungarian wiki.
Please think about, what I wrote you, and try to find some other amusement, then eliminating right information for erronous. If you think, something is wrong, you can correct it, argument, but this brutal reversing way is somehow disgusting. Is it not that for you? Antifinnugor 09:42, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bishonen, Please see User:Dbenbenn/Antifinnugor for a nearly-final draft. Make any changes you see fit. I'll move it to RfC in a few days. (I hope you don't consider this spam! I'm writing here because you got involved in the discussion on my talk page.) Dbenbenn 19:17, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Regarding "Christmas"
Bishon wrote:
"Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. If you don't stop adding copyrighted material to Christmas you will be banned from editing Wikipedia.--Bishonen | Talk 19:02, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)"
Bishon, I am sorry you have the opinion that Philosophy is "nonsense" -- personally, I agree with Princeton's definition:
"the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics." Nonetheless, I understand the subjectivity of it all and at the surface it appears to be nonsense, though to the uninitiated most of the text currently in "Christmas" is subjective (there is even a section labeled "Theories regarding the origin of the date of Christmas" which is right?).
In regards to Copyrighted material, I assure you I have authorization from the original author. In fact, I was planning on adding a link to the Wikipedia article from the original Copyrighted source, but you kept deleting my addition.
Bishon, I apologize if I take a different view from you but the fact is this article addition to "Christmas" was well-labeled and I believe well-placed, also there is no known copyright infringement because I wrote it. I think it would be fair to move this discussion to a public forum before deleting my addition to the "free content encyclopedia that anyone can edit" because you seem to be biased, a bit of a fascist and quick to delete the work of others while reveling in yours -- I am sure you do not speak for all of Wikipedia, because at very least I am a part of Wikipedia and you do not speak for me.
I don't know what you're talking about there, I'm afraid, Gabriel. I have not deleted any contribution of yours. If you look under the "History" tab of Christmas, you will see who has deleted what. By "nonsense", I was referring to the additions that your IP (either you or somebody else who shares the same IP) made to Democratic Party (United States) and John Edwards a while ago. If you look again at the Talk page for 66.74.131.27, you will see that my remarks were directed at the IP, not at you personally: if somebody else was using that IP to vandalise the political pages, then I was talking to them, not you. If you add obvious copyright material to an article without saying anything in the edit field (how is that "well-labelled"?) or on Talk:Christmas, it will, and should, be deleted quickly. Other editors do not have a chrystal ball, to be able to foretell that you have plans for claiming authorship later. To assure me, much later, on my personal talk page, with the addition of a few random insults, that you wrote the material yourself isn't the same thing as giving timely information. I see you have now put back the material into Christmas yet again. I advise you to explain on Talk:Christmas that you own the copyright, preferably with some evidence. Meanwhile, since you would like to see the discussion in a public forum, I will copy your post and mine to "Talk:Christmas myself. Look under the heading "Copyvio by anon".--Bishonen | Talk 20:43, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
--
Bishonen, I apologize for the mix-up -- I saw the copyvio removal and the note from you and put two and two together...incorrectly...I should have paid more attention. In either case, I appreciate your reply and your insightful comments.
Regarding the political page, that wasn't me...mix-up I guess -- going forward I will post under my name to stop this from happening in the future...
and a fact from the article Anne Bracegirdle, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.
Did you know?
Regarding the above comment. I know several interesting facts, but I suspect they woudld not want to put them on the front page! I see some other poor soul has a lambasting on my new friend's page this morning - you are the only person not to have received one, I am begining to wonder if he is not a sock puppet and your alto-ego! Have a nice day Giano 08:03, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Have you seen the latest proclamation from on high?- this is getting better by the moment. Giano 14:50, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi
Just at this machine for the day, and trying to update The Cantos with the fruits of my Yultide reading, but the wiki is so slow that I've almost given up. Trust you had a nice break yourself. Filiocht 15:53, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your support on the above page, were I persona grata there I would point out to him talk:Palladian architecture which is how one goes about a re-write, on second thoughts I probably would not, as he probably thinks though that's just a page for daft Italians, interesting him mentioning my nationality I thought. Anyway I am glad to see the "to be ignored list" is growing, I expect you will join its ranks soon. Seriously though I think it best to follow Wetman and Geogre's advice and ignore - he is making a big enough prat of himself without my help. Must go the chianti is calling - Happy New Year Giano 18:16, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bishonen, thanks for the tip. Are you a Finnish person? (The name suggests this for me). antifinnugor 17:46, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I mean this in a friendly spirit, Antifinnugor: in your own interest, you should remove "Balf"'s endorsement on the RfC page, it's only making you look ridiculous. I don't know and don't care if Balf is a sock puppet of yours or a newbie friend who has registered only for the purpose of voting against the VfD and the RfC, but he/she is obviously one or the other, and it doesn't make any difference which: that endorsement tips the whole thing over the edge into farce.--Bishonen | Talk 20:02, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I have no control of other people around. I am certainly not Balf. I am glad, others see bachmans vandalization and dogmatization, and do not like it either. antifinnugor 20:40, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Miserly Towers
Are not shaping up to anything, they are merely a passtime as i founf the foto homeless and unwanted already on the site. Had a look at Anne Bracegirdle she was obviously a "piece de toute droit" in her day. I'm not well today, bad head and nausea, I can't think why, children very noisy except for eldest who is in bed, keep checking he is breathing - so far he is - just. Giano 16:40, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
What dreaded M word? Stupid boy has just over-indulged, like the rest of the family, nuisance is we have to go out again this evening. Giano 17:45, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Oh Bishonen!, - I am mortified, I had not noticed Anne B was on the front page, my screen does not display the botton half unless I scroll down, I am so short sighted I have to have very big print. "Piece de toute droit" is the french translation for "bit of all right" which is English slang, translated means "seems like a nice girl". I don't thing Miserable Towers will ever make the front page somehow; but what has happened to good old John Vanbrugh, he should have been there by now. Have just been out to a dinner, which has just about finished us, will now sleep for a month. Take care Giano 23:09, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I have just seen what you mean about Misery Towers and the front page, you are clever to spot these things. I'm glad Philip is being so kind to categorise all these things, perhaps he can make a category for Church Towers without churches. I see he is on categories to be deleted trying to rid the world of supermarkets, that can only be a good thing. Misery Towers will not make the front page because it is a short stub, not rocket science, and I had never heard of them until yesterday when I saw an appeal by Sannse for a page to accompany the picture; whereas Anne B is a well written long and informatice article by a respected editor - It is my new year's resolution to be modest and kind to everybody - so I shall spend the next 10 hours looking for some more restoration plays for your category. Felicitations Giano 10:47, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
afu rfc
I am not exactly sure what you mean (and, re [committee writing trouble there], do have some difficulty parsing these guidelines). I did think that Dbenbenn went online with this not at the best of moments, just when I thought afu had lost interest, but there is ample evidence of several people trying to reason with him with angelic patience. My patience however, I believe, understandably, has expired, and I will not argue with him any more. I do believe he is sincere, but if he is, he must be incredibly challenged in the common sense department, and it seems all our efforts have not availed to dispel his impression of being the victim of a KGB-like conspiracy even one bit. I chalk him up as a cabalist/troll, and only hope to get some community support out of this RfC to allow editors to waste less time with him in the future. dab(ᛏ) 10:30, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry - is the point that it needs to "endorsing" rather than "certifying" signatures? What is the difference between "certifying" and "endorsing"? I should think "certification" is the stronger term, but would it be sufficient for me to move my signature from "certifying" to "endorsing"? I am afraid I do not seem to grasp the technical procedure exactly. dab(ᛏ) 10:53, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I think I see. But if you look at some of the 'approved pages', there do not seem to be any additional signatures in the 'evidence of trying and failing' section, but the criterion seems to be, two signatures in the 'certifying the basis' section, i.e. as far as I can see, the rfc is 'approved', even technically. I apologize if this is false and I am just too dense to get your point, however. dab(ᛏ) 11:14, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Edit summary
Hehe, thanks for the edit summary on WP:AN. Concise, accurate and funny. --fvw* 22:39, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
Thanks! I was afraid of seeming callous--sad case, poor language skills, etc--but couldn't resist. I feel for Gtabary, beleaguered by that infuriated nutjob on his talk page, I think he could use some support on the RfC (hint, hint).--Bishonen | Talk 23:24, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I wasn't actually involved so I doubt I have much of interest to say on the matter, but I'll have a look and see if there's not some worthwhile opinion I can agree with. --fvw* 23:26, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
Hi, sorry if I'm just being dense, but I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting should be done with the references in the Cat's Eye Nebula in your comment on its nomination for featured status. Could you maybe point me towards an example page with references in the style you prefer? Thanks! Worldtraveller 23:44, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your further explanation! The numbers should actually be mostly consecutive in the article, it's just that I've cited a couple of papers more than once. I added them at different times so I might have got the numbering messed up - I'll check this now. I think my reference style has ended up being somewhere in between the WP:MOS recommendations and what I do with astronomy papers, but the refs do have page numbers, they're all in the form Authors, year, title, journal, volume, page. Maybe I should make that clearer, perhaps by putting v134, p427 or something like that.
Anyway thanks again for your comments! Worldtraveller 12:13, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
afu
no, it's quite okay. I am myself surprised at the sudden fawning tone. but see my reply. dab(ᛏ) 10:55, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your vote, but more importantly for fixing that spelling abomination. I'm so embarrassed right now. --fvw* 16:49, 2005 Jan 5 (UTC)
OK
What happened to the history? I don't have access to IRC as I'm at work. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:13, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
It's not on my watchlist. I tried editing the page and discovered it had been blanked so I had to revert back to the good version. That IP address has been blocked for 24 hours now. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:35, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
What a delight to see this on Main page today. Congratulations. Filiocht 08:36, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, it will probably be quite good when it's finished Giano 11:10, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the note: this place is so slow in response time just now that I am not getting to see much on the fools and knaves front just yet. No doubt they are all still here. I think |Main page FAs should probably be automatically be protected for their 24 hours of glory, but no doubt that's anti-wiki censorship.
I'm about to post my notes on Canto LXXXIII soon and will finish the Pisan sequence tomorrow, I hope. About 8000 words and only 33 cantos to go, plus a Legacy section and copyedits. Will be wikipedia's longest article on a single book, I'd guess. The Cantos plus List of cultural references in The Cantos will, when finished, be the best resource for new/confused readers of Pound's poem on the web, so they'll probably end up on VfD. Then I may retire, but there's still Ezra Pound and William Carlos Williams needing improvement. An all the red links off the aforementioned list, and lots more I'd like to do, really. Enough about me, hope you're bearing up in the face of fools, vandals and crap technology. Filiocht 12:50, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
Restoration comedy
Uh, could you say that again more slowly, please? I should make sure I what when I what?--Bishonen | Talk 12:34, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm afraid the confusion is entirely mutual, I don't recall ever having raised the topic of Restoration comedy with you, though I suppose I could nonetheless inform you you should make sure you look both ways when crossing the road.
Clarifying the only comment I've made to you recently (see comment titled "Thanks" three headers up), I was thanking your for fixing the ofcourse I wrote on my RfA. --fvw* 14:04, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)
Oh, that, I'd already forgotten about it and hadn't even registered it was about Restoration comedy (which I've put on my watchlist now). I don't think the trick is of much use at the moment, but for a while yesterday there was at least one database slave that was up to date, so it was a question of reloading the page until you got a query from that one. In order to ignore the probably outdated response from the cache you had to use action=purge (just put that in the URL, just like when it says action=edit or action=history), which removes cache entries for the page (or you could just disable caching in your Special:Preferences I think). Anyway, I don't think it's of much use at the moment, alas. --fvw* 15:04, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)
Whtat's wrong with it? - be honest. I'd rather have an objection than nothing at all - where is everyone, am I alone on this site? Giano 12:25, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nice picture, sadly wrong architect, its one of the designs submitted but never built. Thanks any way Giano 17:05, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I kinda liked the Bastard Administrator tag, personally...
Especially since I was writing to you to vent how some skank, 4.250.198.72 reverted my History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire article less than 2 hours after I entered it. To #4...'s credit, there was an apology tag: "Sorry if I reverted while you're still in progress." Geez. D/F was on the official clean-up site. I know this isn't a newbie. He only has today's listings to his credit - Buddhism and the Salem Witch Hunt (isn't that appropriate?). Meelar reverted the article back, & even cleaned up my formatting (bless him) but still. Creepy. Methinks this qualifies as my first official act of vandalism or some sort of initiation ritual. So...how's your day going, Bishonen? allie 22:10, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Userpage
Duh! Is that why when I click on Alisonsage it always says that Wikipedia doesn't have a page like that and do I want to create one? Well, well, well...allie 22:57, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I had similar thoughts. And it may be time to finally drum up the developers to get some light into this. But I suppose even mathematicians can be perfect asses when blinded by nationalism. I do not believe it is afu. His style is different. He uses sarcasm, and he actually seems to get a point if you shove it into his face repeatedly (note how he finally seemed to accept that I was not 'condemning' afu regardless of his sock's status). I suppose he really just hardly speaks any English at all, and decides to assume hostility until the contrary is established beyond doubt. I suppose he simply has just no clue what is going on, except that he has gathered somehow that someone was bashing one of his countrymen. I do hope Nyenyec will be able to sort it out with him, if this continues.
I am thinking about retracting my RFAr. The committee seems to want mediation, first the lazy bastards (*ahem*). I think I have done more than my duty already, and I will not go to mediation with afu, but I suppose it will be bad style to refuse mediation and still press an rfar? Neutrality asked for an evidence page before accepting (and his vote would suffice to approve of the request). What is your take on this? Should I begin to assemble the evidence page, weeping, or should I just leave it alone? dab(ᛏ) 18:14, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thanks, Bishonen. See reply on my talkpage. Wikimedia seems to be grinding to a halt, just now; I'll be back tomorrow. dab(ᛏ) 20:01, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
re Gubbubu, you are of course right that he does not seem to be off to a good start for making himself known as a scientific and polite user on en: at all. But then he did not make any crazy edits to article namespace, and he compares favourably to afu in any case (who wouldn't, though!), and I don't think we should make a case of it... it's just weird.
re RFAr, well, so I guess I'll have to collect some evidence then. Just when I decided that it's not worth the bother and wanted to retract the request. Will you move your evidence from my subpage to the official evidence page? I'll also ask the 'friendly' hungarians to help me out, I have hardly any time at the moment.
I didn't get your email, btw, but that's probably due to my spamfilter, sorry. My spam is driving me crazy, recently, and I lowered the threshold for non-whitelisted from:s.
you are right. no sacrifices. It's just WP, and the articles will just deteriorate again, when we're not looking. Still, I think it's worth to stand up for some principles, now and again. It will later be possible to point to this as a precedent case, if nothing else. dab(ᛏ) 20:50, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
PS, I looked through my spam box, and I found a message from you dating back to 20 December (re, Norse mythology). Not the new one, though. I'm confused now, and really should get my act together, spamfilter-wise :o( dab(ᛏ) 22:42, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Restaurationskomödie, John Vanbrugh etc.
Hi Bishonen,
thanks for your message - that was my first one from outside the german wikipedia. And I also learned that you are (partly) behind all that marvellous articles I've translated through the last couple of weeks. -- I simply checked the english "featured articles" for what seemed to me interesting and then sat down to transcribe them into german. John Vanbrugh was particularly interesting as I could not find much german literature about him - also I have the very large public library of Cologne very near to my flat. You were wondering what the de:Restaurationskomödie means (spelled on purpose wrong here, otherwise your page would have a link to the german wikipedia here). It is a socalled "Interwiki-link", which links for example the restauration comedy to the German "Restaurationskomödie" or links the John Vanbrugh Article to its german translation. de stands for german, es for spanish, it for italian etc. - and if you can't read it and see only funny signs it is probably korean, japanese, hebrew etc. If you set up something like this, it will show up under the toolbox in the left column, header will be "Other languages"....best regards and thanks for the tip with Cibber. -- BS Thurner Hof 18:58, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Gibbon
Thanks for the copy edit. There was a notation, "please see talk." I couldn't find the talk. It wasn't on the Gibbon page. But I appreciate it, and best regards allie 22:13, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Critique appreciated. Swedenborg wasn't my addition, don't even know who he is - a prior contribution. Searching for reliable information regarding his unfornate medical condition (info in article inaccurate). Would like to attempt a psychohistorical portrait, since breeches were the common garb at the time, which made him a ludicrous figure in society. Couldn't ride a horse; difficulty walking (hence the reference to his stench, even by the standards of the time), and a factor in his absorbtion in his literary endeavor. Is that acceptable?
Want to take out the primary/secondary references since they're already in D/F, which sustained numerous reverts to keep that incredibly long paragraph to illustrate his style. Okay with me. Latest revert by Stbalbach & he certainly has the credentials. Will clean up my typos, but asked him to review my comments on IV & IVI for accuracy. At this point, I've contributed enough to make D/F credible, & will check re: primary v. secondary sources is clarified there.
The lovely & elegant Mme de Stael is accurate. How do you do the dot thing? Never mind. I ask too many questions. Nevertheless, it's in my citations. Best Regards, Bish allie 00:29, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Vandalism on D/F
Third time since I began work. I listed in on the site, but it's annoying the heck out of me. Someone keeps inserting that interminably long excerpt in disguise. This time: "minor edit to blah blah." Almost threw in the towel. allie 03:00, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind dispensing some FA advice?
In order to compensate for some obscure character flaw (I assume), I was considering making another run at Featured Article status. What is you opinion on Thomas Urquhart, John Day (printer) or William Camden? Maybe they're too much on the flimsy side? They're definitely short compared to other biographies that have made it as FAs. PRiis 05:31, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Well, thank you. No hurry for me. In fact, after I sent the message, I thought, maybe that was a bit out of line to offload that on you. So, don't waste too much time, and don't even feel like you have to. PRiis 20:33, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I really appreciate your taking the time to look these over. I think you're right, and I'll take your advice on expanding the Urquhart. He was quite a colorful guy, and I want to be sure I get that across--I'll get more specific. I guess I should have put all these on "peer review" but from past experience, it seems like these sorts of articles don't tend to generate lots of comments--but maybe I shouldn't pre-judge. I owe you! PRiis 19:13, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
remove
yes. I am a bit unhappy about the rfar, since afu seems to have stopped his edit-warring anyway (although we let him keep his article, for now, I'm just too fed up to police around). I am really charmed by Gubbubu, the concept of 'false statement' seems to be so remote from him that he actually makes no difference between 'claim' and 'proof'. O those happy mathematicians! Well, do remove the 3RR evidence, if you like. More than a chastisement of afu, I'm looking for some vindication of the editors involved with this, to know if this is how cases like afu are properly addressed, in the view of the arbcom. dab(ᛏ) 08:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
on second thoughts, if you don't mind, please leave your section in place. I refer to it from my section, and it's just nice to have in case anyone wants to look into the socks issue. regards, dab(ᛏ) 14:03, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
D/F & time off
I did compare the revisions, Bishonen, and no: I did not add that excerpt. I did try do discuss it, assuming good faith!. And yes, I am taking a time out. I think that is a very good idea. I don't understand why someone would come in, review a page, notice that a header is missing, not change it, yet make a comment. How is that good faith, or good wikietiquette? How hard is reinserting a title, for a newbie? Or discussing why you're reinserting something that was vandalized once, and deliberately taken out, and blatantly re-inserted without any explanation on the talk page? This person made a point of stating that he's not the world authority on Gibbon. However: I did not insert that copy. The history page shows that. allie 13:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thanks, Bishonen. See reply on my talkpage. Wikimedia seems to be grinding to a halt, just now; I'll be back tomorrow. dab (ᛏ) 20:01, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
