Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:37, 18 September 2011

Template:Archive box collapsible

Murasaki Shikibu

You picked a tough one, you must be a glutton for punishment. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 01:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

PS. Don't tell Ceoil if he ever gets off his block, but that picture on your page reminds me very much of Dublin. Malleus Fatuorum 01:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

My ears are burning. Anyway, TK the old Shikibu‎‎ lead image looked better, the new one is fine indeed but lacking symmetry. Change back or I will never talk to you again, and put you on my list (between Pol Pot and Mao). Ceoil (talk) 19:49, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

It's meant for the diary page but I wanted to see how it looked & didn't like it when I switched computers - but still thought I'd wait for someone (cough, cough) to say something. I know you're not talking to me - you keep telling me that. It makes me very sad, you know. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

No its ok, now that I've gotten my way I'm taking to you again. So how are you, I see very productive, I'm very impressed with all the new articles, and they are so beautifully illustrated. Tune for you , a song that is certainly in my top 50 (sad male alert), and that I've prob give you before. But jesus christ can that man can sing. And also , unspeakly romantic fodder almost but not quite equaled here. Ceoil (talk) 20:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy you're talking to me again - all I had to do is give in. Thanks so much for the oh so sad tunes. I thought I liked Roy Harper's better that TMC's but not sure on a second listen. I only have one new page and thanks for the edits to it; I've thought about submitting to DYK but have made myself persona non grata there, so it will sit, unseen, beautiful illustrations and all. But I blame Yomangani for adding the redlinks that I turned blue. Have been busy in real life - how are you? Truthkeeper (talk) 20:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine thanks, working long hours again, up to my neck in sealth taxes and facing another heavy austerity budget in December, but happy enough. Ive noticed a few grey hairs in the last few weeks, but am remaining calm, they might go away again. I'm waiting for my local waterstones to get a copy of the Durer book JNW recommended, but its been out of print since 1997. I dont trust myself with a credit card so cant get over the internet, but they are being very helpful and ethink they can get in a few weeks or so.Ceoil (talk) 20:54, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

By the way, when I was in my early 20s the question of wheather harper's or this mortal coil's version was a better was a matter of life and death and a very heavy, polarises, long term late night discussion. I also once broke it off with a girl because she prefered the second to the (vastly superior steve albini produced) third Wedding Present album. I am that sad. Choose you next words carefully, dear. Ceoil (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Well obviously Harper's is purer and better, and when I listened to This Mortal Coil's the first time I didn't at all like it. The second time, to my surprise, I thought, huh, not so bad. Are we still talking? Truthkeeper (talk) 21:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Just about, but a lot depends on whether you prefer the deeply affecting and utterly beautiful to the poetic and forlorn and utterly beautiful . I prefer this mortal coils version, even though Tim buckley is a favourite of mine. Ceoil (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Well we may have to part ways & you go back to not speaking to me. They're both very different and mortal coil's is beautiful, but I prefer Buckley. You know when it comes to music you're asking the wrong person - basically tone deaf and all that - so you may have to think about giving me a pass. But if it comes to not talking again I guess I'll have to live with it. Sadly. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I know Modernist likes Buckely, so your in good company. Ceoil (talk) 21:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

That's something. And you're right in the piece you deleted, the key line is very different in the two versions. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, btw I meant to thank you for the edits to the series of articles on the Heian noblewomen. Until I get more specific feedback re Murasaki Shikibu not much more I can do there and working on the other pages gives me better perspective re the first page. Truthkeeper (talk) 02:58, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm full of admiration for what you've done with this, it's a very nice piece of work. Malleus Fatuorum 02:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

PS. I could live without music, but I couldn't live without words or pictures. Malleus Fatuorum 02:57, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, that really means a lot coming from you. I needed to step back and now, finally, think I see where I went wrong with the organization. It's a tricky piece, little bits from sources sewn together, so much unknown, but interesting. I know what you mean about words and pictures - I'm the same. Truthkeeper (talk) 03:16, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

PS - regarding the music - I do enjoy it and am lucky to have Ceoil and Modernist add to that to my life. It's an unexpected wiki perks. Truthkeeper (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind, I had a little tinker with it. Malleus is right, it's a beautiful article. --John (talk) 07:44, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. The prose definitely needs tweaking and I never know what to do about the split infinitives. Anyway, thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Japanese writers' templates

Category:Japanese writers' templates, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 16:34, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Empress Shōshi

On 14 September 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Empress Shōshi, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that as a 12-year-old, Empress Shōshi (artistic depiction pictured) was sent by her father Fujiwara no Michinaga to live in Emperor Ichijō's harem? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Empress Shōshi.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I thought you'd forsworn any further involvement with DYK. Quitter! (or rather, Non-quitter!) Yomangani 01:15, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

It's all your fault. I can't resist a red-link, though I haven't gotten to Teishi yet - the sources are a bit sparse on her. I thought the Shoshi article turned out well enough to submit - so I did. But I had to review another article per QpQ and of course made a mistake! Truthkeeper (talk) 01:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah well, you have the Tale of Ise waiting to be filled too and I don't think I can take the blame for that. I'm bored with WP again now, so I'm off. Yomangani 01:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes I noticed that today - but I after this effort I'll need a break from 10th century Japan. Will come back to it later. I've enjoyed having you around - and thanks for all the help. You sure you don't want to stay a little longer? Truthkeeper (talk) 01:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Btw - I think I'll take a Wkipedia style !vote for the lead image for Murasaki Shikibu - do you have a preference? Ceoil told me above what he doesn't like, Johnbod prefers to see an earlier print, and I'm undecided. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Support. As long as a "restorer" doesn't get at it. Yomangani 08:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Support, per above. Good choice, maybe even a great choice. Ceoil (talk) 20:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Phew - wouldn't want you not talking to me again. I like it and don't know how it got stuck in the gallery, but Yomangani makes a good point about restorers - I don't want it whitened or anything, looks good as it is. Btw - am reorganizing, rewriting and shoving around a few more images, but since you're here might ask for help. Johnbod mentioned a mini galley in the text and I don't know how to do that or what to add. What do you think? Truthkeeper (talk) 20:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about another mini gallery, the page is very well balanced between words and images at the moment, in my view. What are you thinking. Ceoil (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm thinking I'm taking a break for about to think about it. I've just added another multi-image group to the 'legacy' section, which I like, so am thinking it's prob okay as is and prob doesn't need a gallery. Thinking. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think a gallery is necessary. At some point I'd probably want to do a page on the genji-e art and then have a gallery, but not here. I do want to re-do the existing gallery and some more few tweaks are needed before I respond to Johnbod's points. Have a few thing to take care of first. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Congrats

Delighted!! Keep it up. Ceoil (talk) 19:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm actually delighted too, but for sure could not have done it without so many people pitching in to help. I don't want to tackle any big pages for a while; will prob spend some time tidying, or something. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Tagging orphaned articles is easy work, or adding infoboxes. Pay is lousey though. Ceoil (talk) 20:57, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Ooo, now why I hadn't I thought of that? You're right it is easy work - will get to it right away. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:13, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! Great job! Despite of the Genji Award, my contribution was minimal. bamse (talk) 21:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Your contribution was much more than minimal; I was often lost in the sources and you straightened me out. I am happy with the result and everyone who helped deserves an award for this. It was a tough page to finish. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:13, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations and many thanks for the lovely award from me too. I supported at the very end (finally had the chance to finish reading it carefully) - very nicely done. Ruhrfisch _><>° 21:36, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Well done and congratulations - lots of hard work; lots of learning...Modernist (talk) 22:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

That's an understatement. It's definitely the most difficult page I've tried to do, but I have learned so much. I think there are more pages to be written about the art, but I need more sources and a break from the subject before venturing back. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Understandable, but you can be proud. Ceoil (talk) 23:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I am actually proud of the Murasaki Shikibu page. It was a lot of work, I learned a lot, and I like how it ended up. I'm very grateful to Johnbod - for some reason his comments pushed something loose in my brain and I was able to make the final push to bring it to the shape it's in now. I think in that respect FAC is very good - the feedback is necessary sometimes. I'm also proud to see how many people pitched in with help. It's nice around here when it works the way it should. Truthkeeper (talk) 00:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey, can I ask for a copy edit and general remarks on The Entombment (Bouts). You do hidden comments very well, so.....askin. Ceoil (talk) 10:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Glad you're askin. And nice of you to give me something to do other than delinking and pulling off useless tags - I'll have a look at it. Truthkeeper (talk) 12:38, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Uh, I just committed you to something else; John Keats, sorry. I've been watching the page develop for years and User talk:Spanglej seems committed able and knowlegable. But needs a guide through the review process, and as you are one of the last standing lith persons....share a project? I do have a few books and sources but prob not the knowledge ye guys have. I can lend a hand and know the processes, but its your area here. Ceoil (talk) 13:30, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I just posted on Spanglej's page - you two are making my watchlist light up. Yes, I'd definitely be interested in guidance for Keats, and actually Jabborwocky too, as I posted. Keats for sure is a good candidate for FA with a little work and I'd really be happy to see more lit pages being finished. He's a bit out of my area, but I do love his poetry. Truthkeeper (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Brillaiant. I dont see need for heavy lifting here, the article is fine, just encouragment, guidance and friendship. Thanks TK. Ceoil (talk) 14:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep, that's what I had in mind. But reading the page would be a good place to start. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

You doing me a huge favour here, but I dont want you to get distracted from other projects, its more that you know the subject matter, and I need your eye. Your only thanks will be . Ceoil (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't have any other projects and the distraction is good. I'm a big believer in PR; don't think enough people take advantage, though I'm as guilty as anyone else for not reviewing and am in awe of the work that Brian Boulton and Ruhrfisch do there. I think Keats will benefit from PR - we can both do it to cut down the work or to give double feedback. It's an important page for literature and I'm happy to help see more lit pages making their way through the review process - not many are these days. I've just spend half an hour trying to place the few films scenes I can't remember from the vid - oh and nice romantic tune too! I like the images. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

He he re the vid; I though since I was asking a favour I might as well be charming. I agree with every thing else - B Boulton and Ruhrfisch, they are basically keeping that ship afloat. Brian has helped me more than once and Ruhrfisch is very good to you. Ceoil (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I ask you for favours all the time and am rarely charming. Will have to work on that I suppose. And yes, Ruhrfisch has been very good to me, especially review-wise. I've really benefited from his reviews. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Have a listen to this . One of the things I like about electronic music is that there are no words, no intended meaning, its just about the joy of sound, and pure. This one has an amazing resolution about 2/3s way in, exceptionally clever and beautiful. Ceoil (talk) 11:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

It scrambles my brain - dunno why, but very hard for me to listen all the way through. I tried earlier and didn't get far, and tried again just now. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thats fine, but to change track try this , dissonant but melodic at the same time. Ceoil (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I like this. Needs to the listened to a few time, but beautiful. The dissonance isn't that noticeable to me. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I am a big fan of dissonance, that section is an uncharestic melodic passage from a work that in other parts is pure, delightful, atonal noise. Im always affected by a beautiful melody, but well a put together cacophony hits me on a viseral level above that. Ceoil (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Another User:ItsLassieTime sock

• CharlesWTrowbridge (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

–MuZemike 21:21, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

• It's a fair number of pages. I spotchecked one and it was paraphrased appropriately, otherwise I'd suggest adding all these to the CCI. I'll check a few more - but I think our options are to punt to CCI where they'll sit forever, check and tag the pages as needed, or check and leave them if they seem okay. He/She is a decent writer and makes nice pages & I'm still bogged down with Potter from a year ago. Very prolific sock - a lot more prolific than I'll ever be. I don't know the answer to this situation. Anyway, thanks for letting me know. Has it been added to the SPI? I thought I had that watched. Truthkeeper (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't going to bother with an SPI, but I'm in the process right now of deleting all the user's creations per WP:CSD#G5. –MuZemike 21:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I was going to suggest that as another option, but it seemed a lot of work. Overall I think it's the best tactic since these are all new pages. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

FYI, for those who have doubts that this was ItsLassieTime, three more  Confirmed socks just popped up, one of them for the sole purpose to harass me:

• NFLSuperhero (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• VideoGameJunkie (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• VideoGameJunkieMuZemike (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

One of the articles was recreated, which I re-deleted and salted. –MuZemike 21:00, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You realize that my page is watched and usually there are reactions, often not very nice, to this situation. The last time was here and at that time I decided I didn't really want to deal with this anymore, as far as scrubbing. Now you're a target and it's not really fun, because I know you've put a lot of time and effort into this situation. If we can't pin down an IP and block that, I just don't know what the solution is. I noticed one of the users you linked above received a barnstar, which is ludicrous to be honest, and also noticed another article I was looking at yesterday (about a poem) had been written by yet another sock of the same user and that's a page that will need to be scrubbed. All this scrubbing needs an entire taskforce and honestly we haven't the editors to do it, so I'm all for deleting pages, putting as much as possible on watchlists to catch him/her, but it's just so endless, don't you think? Truthkeeper (talk) 21:28, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I am aware of that; this is not the first time ILT has harassed me in this fashion. In any case, I have blocked another IP range, which should help a little. –MuZemike 22:24, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

That seems to have worked well in the past, if only for a few weeks. Since you're looking at them, I have a few more for you to check but need to dig into the histories of a some pages to gather them. Might as well identify as many as we can while we're at it. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2011 (UTC)