Misplaced Pages

User talk:Giano II: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:49, 25 April 2008 editDdstretch (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users16,798 edits Instructions to not add an infobox to Little Moreton Hall← Previous edit Revision as of 09:26, 26 April 2008 edit undoGiano II (talk | contribs)22,233 edits →Instructions to not add an infobox to Little Moreton HallNext edit →
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 91: Line 91:
==Instructions to not add an infobox to ]== ==Instructions to not add an infobox to ]==
I've reverted your addition of this, since it seems to have been added with no reason. There should be either a specific discussion about this on the article's talk page, or there should be a pointer to a more centralised discussion, since I see you have added this message to many such articles without any good reason for it being added given. ] ] 21:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC) I've reverted your addition of this, since it seems to have been added with no reason. There should be either a specific discussion about this on the article's talk page, or there should be a pointer to a more centralised discussion, since I see you have added this message to many such articles without any good reason for it being added given. ] ] 21:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
:Giano, I have commented on the article's talk page, and copied my comments over to ] as well; you may wish to add to them. ] (]) 22:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Those with the attention span of a gnat, and inability to read what is in the first four lines of the lead, and those who enjoy seeing high quality images reduced to the size of postage stamps may see the need for a box. Those of a higher intelligence may prefer to read, learn and enjoy a page. ] (]) 09:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

== Reading over PPofM ==

Question - is there a different meaning of ] besides the one the link leads to? Perhaps something more architectural? This definition just doesn't seem to fit very well in this sentence: "Designed as an ] and a ceremonial route to the throne room, the processional route begins with an external horseshoe-shaped staircase which leads from the court of honour to the open gallery known as the Gallery of Hercules." Just seems a little odd to have a combination ceremonial route and firing range, but what do I know about medieval castles? ] (]) 05:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
:Solved my own problem by linking to Wiktionary, where there is an architectural definition. On the other hand, Illustration #3 may need some work still. Is it intended to represent the palace as it exists today? If so, '''D''' is an existing chapel, not a future one; and C now includes private apartments and the Napoleon Museum. Copy edit has been done, I'll try to identify any wonky reference sources later today. ] (]) 08:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:26, 26 April 2008

Interesting things and amusing things


“ Civil is not a policy. It has no sanctions. It is not longstanding. People who volunteer here are longstanding. "Civil" is a vague idea poorly expressed. It does not license this school marmish finger wagging, and it does not allow Mary Whitehouse campaigns, and it does not sanction people driving off or blocking their argumentative opponents. It is the inane interpreted by the insane." Geogre (talk) 14:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC) ”


All posts regarding the recent problems concerning the aftermath of the ill advised IRC Case can be found here here please post there anything you have to say pertaining to that matter. Due to the obsessive behaviour of certain people, the page is not on my watch list. I may glance at it from time to time, then again I may not. I do not acknowledge any sanction from the Arbcom as they had no business accepting the IRC Case in the first instance. It was a malignant case from start to finish, and it remains so. I was sanctioned for daring to question IRC behaviour, and highlighting the problems it causes, and which the Arbcom still refuses to address, inspite of voting to do so. Giano (talk) 07:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Just so everyone is quite clear. Please note: ammending an illicit sanction does not make that sanction just, correct or legal. It just becomes an ammended illicit sanction, which I shall continue to ignore. Giano (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


File:Animalibrí.gif

Old messages are at



And now for something completely different

Did you have that flapping bird facing to the right before? Did you, in short, flip the bird? Utgard Loki (talk) 12:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
It's the rampant/sinister FAC criteria Loki - I believe the bird is now sinister. --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Does that mean it's a ... a... bastard bird? (Forgot to sine my wave.) Utgard Loki (talk) 12:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't think so, he's as he's always been...........isn't he? Giano (talk) 12:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps so, but I was worrying about my own Norwegian blue who ain't moved at all since I got him, and I thought your bird had been flipping all about the flippin' cage. Utgard Loki (talk) 13:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry. It occurs to me that my comment probably unhelped someone. They had been aided entirely, but then my reference to Monty Python unhelped them. Utgard Loki (talk) 18:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


Request

I've just read most of your essay, "A fool's guide to writing a featured article", which I found highly enlightening and entertaining! An article I'm currently working on, Elaine Paige, has been put up for a peer review by myself, but it hasn't really sparked much interest. I was wondering that if you had some time to spare (I know time is always of the essence here on Misplaced Pages) could you perhaps briefly skim the article and give some suggestions for improvement? If I'm feeling brave enough, I might even nominate it for FAC, it depends really. If you haven't the time, then no worries. Many thanks. Eagle Owl (talk) 19:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Most? Most? what's wrong with the rest of it. I will take a look sooner rather than later - delighted to. Giano (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Made some comments here for you . It's almost there, as someone else has just said also, just check on those refs to make sure they meet the criteria. Giano (talk) 07:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks for your time and comments! It's much appreciated. Eagle Owl (talk) 15:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Want to read some articles?

Want something to take your mind off IRC stuff? Why not try reading about the 19th century scientists I've been creating stubs on? Have a look at Augustus Matthiessen, George Fownes, Thomas Snow Beck, Martin Barry, and John Allan Broun. What do you think? Carcharoth (talk) 23:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I looked at one of them and raised hard questions on the talk page. Geogre (talk) 10:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on another Main Page appearance - Prince's Palace of Monaco

What a lovely sight. I shall mark my calendar for April 28th - and reserve the evening before for vandalism patrol. Risker (talk) 07:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh hell! people will think I write about nothing but palaces, I do seem rather stuck on them of late, better do another boxer to counteract all this culture next - could be quite apt really a quick biff zap pow. Giano (talk) 07:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Do a video game next! *ducks* dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Do a neglected Neapolitan pop star! An Edit Piaf of Sicily or a Madonna of Roma would surely hit the main page. (Deader is better, of course, but "stable information" doesn't seem important at FAC anymore.) Geogre (talk) 10:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:AE

FYI. Avruch 16:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Giano, I've posted at both FT2's talk page and at the WP:AE thread. I have asked everyone to calm down, and I think one thing that would go a long way towards that would be if you apologised to FT2 for the edit summary you used. Please. For the sake of all our sanities, just apologise, however grudgingly or briefly. Carcharoth (talk) 17:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I shall be making a post regarding FT2 in a while. It will be full and very frank, and contain information that I would not in other circumstances be happy to post on Misplaced Pages. It will not contain an apology. Giano (talk) 18:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, man, don't. It's going to be zero sum, you know, even to you, and certainly for him. Utgard Loki (talk) 18:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Discussions are ongoing! Zero sum for me - I have nothing to lose. Giano (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The AE thread has been closed. I think (and others agree) that this was essentially a continuation of the long discussion about the past block/unblock. There were many questions and comments about that block/unblock. The continued queries about different aspect of the issue blended in with the block discussion kept the discussion going long past the time of an ordinary discussion about a block/unblock.

I hope everyone that asked and answered a question about the block will reflect on whether continuing the discussion was helpful or caused more stress. Less (from everyone) can be more... :) Have a nice night. Take care, FloNight♥♥♥ 23:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it would have been best if those who cooked up the sanctions against me had though of where they were going to lead before imposing them. I'm afraid FT2's distortions of the truth have now become part of the problem too. I may post further on this in the morning, at the moment I am taking advice on future steps. Giano (talk) 23:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I hope, Flo, that those who block and set the conditions for blocks are considering whether they increase or decrease stress, as well. I am not sure that stress reduction is the goal of Misplaced Pages. Massagers do that better. However, the stresses brought out by discussion of the block and particularly the issues behind it are necessarily stressful to those people adhering to a corrupt and corrupting medium. How much utility to the project would be lost by the abandonment of the sooper sekrit channels? How much disruption would be lost? I see the cost/benefit analysis purely in favor of getting rid of the "some admins, some others, some times, all secret" IRC playground, as I have yet to hear of a single good thing it specifically does for Misplaced Pages. I don't ask even for a long list -- just one good that it does that is not done better otherwise. Like Diogenes, I hold my lamp and wait. Geogre (talk) 01:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

thank spam

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral.
Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations.
Thank you again, VanTucky

Taking my case to the Arbcom

Hello Giano you may remember me from the day a chance remark on your talk page led to me being blocked indefinitely. As you may know, I am appealing my block to the Arbcom. Only one problem: they are ignoring every email and communication I am making with them, despite having invited me to make this appeal in December. If there is any help you or your friends could give, I would be so grateful. Yours, Peter. Peter Damian (talk) 17:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

  • No I didn't know, but having done some quick re-search I do now. To be quite honest, no, I don't remember you ever posting here, or anyone ever having been blocked for posting here - how exiting - what on earth did you say? I can't find you in my history either, are you sure you have the right person? I am Giano II - the Devil's representitive on Misplaced Pages. I see you have been blocked again since posting, well my email works, if no else provides the link or explanation first. Giano (talk) 18:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I have had a good look into your case today, all I can find are diffs and links which seem to lead to dead ends. I cannot even find any records of your RFAR from December 2007. Which is very odd. However, I have also found one or two things which I personally find disturbing. If you have followed my wikipedia career you will know that while I'm not averse to charging head on into trouble, I usually understand at least the direction and path I am following. In this instance I don't think I'm the right person to battle on your behalf. Bearing in mind the other person concerned in this case, any input from me would be misjudged and misconstrued by others. I also find the subject matter nauseating. As you are forbidden from commenting on Misplaced Pages, I think you need to find someone who is completely even handed, respected and unafraid of what they may unearth, to represent you. I'm sorry, it cannot be me. Giano (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Instructions to not add an infobox to Little Moreton Hall

I've reverted your addition of this, since it seems to have been added with no reason. There should be either a specific discussion about this on the article's talk page, or there should be a pointer to a more centralised discussion, since I see you have added this message to many such articles without any good reason for it being added given.  DDStretch  (talk) 21:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Giano, I have commented on the article's talk page, and copied my comments over to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Cheshire as well; you may wish to add to them. Risker (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Those with the attention span of a gnat, and inability to read what is in the first four lines of the lead, and those who enjoy seeing high quality images reduced to the size of postage stamps may see the need for a box. Those of a higher intelligence may prefer to read, learn and enjoy a page. Giano (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Reading over PPofM

Question - is there a different meaning of enfilade besides the one the link leads to? Perhaps something more architectural? This definition just doesn't seem to fit very well in this sentence: "Designed as an enfilade and a ceremonial route to the throne room, the processional route begins with an external horseshoe-shaped staircase which leads from the court of honour to the open gallery known as the Gallery of Hercules." Just seems a little odd to have a combination ceremonial route and firing range, but what do I know about medieval castles? Risker (talk) 05:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Solved my own problem by linking to Wiktionary, where there is an architectural definition. On the other hand, Illustration #3 may need some work still. Is it intended to represent the palace as it exists today? If so, D is an existing chapel, not a future one; and C now includes private apartments and the Napoleon Museum. Copy edit has been done, I'll try to identify any wonky reference sources later today. Risker (talk) 08:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Giano II: Difference between revisions Add topic