User talk:Amandajm/archive3

Hello
Sorry for the late response. To your questions, When I said I was "born" with ADHD i ment I was Diagnosed with it later on in my early years of Childhood. - As for the triplets, The word you mentioned isn't even a word.. lacinedi is nor english or any other language. Same with Slyxedic. - By the way move your current talk page to an Archive, This page is taking up 243 Kilobytes. And it's getting hard to to type. Rttam (talk) 12:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

OMG UR SMART
I have no idea if I am doing this right and, as such, I beg your indulgence. I do not know if you remember, but it was I who changed the sentence in your article on St. Peter's Basilica (I held that it was a Cathedral, you told me it was not). I apologize for any obscurity in my reasoning, but I do not, as you suggested, fall under the heading of those who mistake the church for the seat of the Pope. I was actuated by the discovery of the word (Cathedral)'s original definition which, according to my dictionary, is "The church that contains the bishop's throne". Bearing in mind Peter's traditionally held status as the first Bishop of Rome, and also that the Cathedra Petri, beneath its sheath of bronze, is traditionally regarded as the true throne of St. Peter, I formulated the conclusion that the Basilica, as the church that contains the throne, is a cathedral by definition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.141.31 (talk) 03:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, I see that you contribute on the Leonardo Da Vinci page.

Canyou add my website to the links? I cant do so since im a new member

www.quotemaniac.com/Leonardobio.html

Thats if you like it :)

15:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

DYK
I'm on a mountain in Spain or I would have nominated it earlier, but it looks like it's too late now. See this page & also the linked rules. Sorry. Nominations usually go through with no trouble. Johnbod (can't find tilde!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbod (talk • contribs) 18:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Amanda Jam
E.T.B. My response was getting to be as long as the article so I have cut it down! Much of the information I have picked up from a set of notes collated by Vine Hall in a private publication which I do not consider a reliable source, in part because the references do not link directly to the text. It appears that most of this is from the same sources as your friend has seen – Blacket’s log, Blacket’s papers and Mease letters which I suspect are in the Mitchell library in Australia. I do not have access to this, but I have checked as much as I can from original sources in England (and found significant errors). Hence I don’t like to quote this stuff unless it provides a counter to incorrect interpretations or assumptions or bears out known facts. (thus the introduction of his letter about his father). There are two areas I have some concern about. Up to 1838 there is definite evidence of Edmund, John and James being at Stokesley and almost certainly all involved in the mill. A suggestion from some biographical accounts is that the mill there closed in 1841, but it is possible that this was an assumption made without knowledge of the financial crisis of 1838 and because the 1841 census is the first record of them all not being at Stokesley. Alternatively it is possible that the mill continued to operate while the matter was in Chancery. However both James at Edmund are said to have been involved in other activities in Yorkshire around this time - although the Stockton and Darlington connection probably needs verification. Edmund worked as Inspector of Schools in Australia, possibly on the recommendation of the AoC. This recommendation seems to have been brought about by a Mr Cator, implying Edmund had no previous connection with the Archbishop. Is the statement that he worked as Inspector of Schools for the Archbishop in England accurate or has this somehow become mixed in along the way? Freshfield’s role is hypothesis (although he was sometime Treasurer of a Church charity). The AoC at the time was William Howley who apparently had a great interest in architecture.
 * 1) 1838-1841.
 * 2) Archbishop of Canterbury

Anyway here is a pile of stuff I picked up which may be of value, but apart from the Stokesly registers I cannot confirm
 * Between June and October 1838 Edmund was paying bills in Stokesley (an old leather accounts book)
 * Between 6 Oct and 18 Nov 1838 he was paying board to his brother Henry at Smithfield (old leather accounts book)
 * On 25 Dec 1838 and 14 Mar 1839 he paid subscriptions to Stokesley Literary and Scientific society (ibid?)
 * Edmund built a clock for the Methodist church at Stokesley and also a town clock (source unknown)
 * Edmund’s brother John was a stauch Methodist and had two of his children baptised at the Methodist Chapel at Stokeley in 1835 and 1837. (Baptism Records)
 * Edmund’s brother James' first wife was buried at Stokesley Church in 1837. (Registers and gravestone)
 * This James was at some time in legal practice as a partner in the firm of solicitors at Stokesley Garbutt, Blackett and Fawcett. (Source unknown)
 * A Mr Howdery promised letters of introduction – presumably those that Edmund took with him (Mease letter)
 * A Mr Cator wrote to the Archbishop on Edmund’s behalf (possibly family of Cator of Beckenham) (Mease letter)
 * On leaving England “Neither my Father or Mother would bid me good bye, so my old Uncle offered to see us off (Probably John Blacket the elder)” (ETB letter 1859)
 * Another friend was a Michael Metcalfe a Sydney merchant
 * There is a family story that Edmund arrived in Australia with 600 gold sovereigns given by his father tied up in a Bank of England canvas bag. – (possibly a myth)
 * In 1862 Edmund won a medal at the International Exhibition in Liverpool for a carved cedar font. (source unknown)
 * During the 1879 Sydney International Exhibition he was one of the judges assessing musical instruments. (Official record of the Exhibition p 423)
 * Queen Victoria and Prince Albert asked that the stained glass windows for Sydney University be assembled at Windsor Castle before being shipped probably because they included a portrait of the Queen (source unknown)
 * There are two stones with initials on the University – one with MM above the organ loft railing after his sister in law Mary Mease;- the other with MES directly opposite the south wall for Mary Styles a friend. (Blacket’s diary)
 * His son Cyril said “The whole family had to stand at the table at meal times until father came in. When he arrived – right on the tick of time, they would all sit down. His sons always called him Sir”. There are other references to Edmund being a stickler for punctuality
 * The portrait described in Morton Herman’s book is believed not to be Edmund, but his elder brother James.
 * Russell Blacket lived at Wollongong and started a school there (Advertisements Illawara Mercury February and July 1869)
 * Russell sailed over on the ship Jason – 9 Oct 1858 to 13 Jan 1859
 * Russell’s son Wilfred was born at Redfern in September 1859.
 * Edmund had a cousin Tom (T B) Stephens who was politically active in Queensland

I have concerns about two external references in the article. RegardsMotmit 20:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The Tilbury one you brought in shows a chart with serious genealogical errors (and refers to the wretched Blacket cloth) – stemming from Vine Hall’s work.
 * That external Blackett database has next to nothing on Edmund and requires extensive navigation (it also contains the genealogical errors, although hopefully they will address them. I have set up a Blackett page to link to it instead so I think it ought to go from here
 * Thanks for the comments
 * The concerns expressed 1837-1842 are more personal ones, as I would like to pin down more precisely what happened. The article is fine for 1837-41 but there is always a risk that someone will slap in that he worked at the mill all that time based on published sources. I hope to find time to follow some leads including those you have given me.
 * What I like about Wiki is the ability to link to other articles which saves writing too much in the home article and allows people to make their own interpretations. It is good to be able to put the record straight – but as another editor wrote also, it is just a collection of pixels which some idiot can come and knock over with a single blow. I notice you have already had a close instance. Published biographies in country B tend to say X came to B from A which when copied to a global encyclopaedia looks a bit B-centric and probably provokes reactions. Saying X started at A and went to B at least follows the biographic time-line (and the same applies for Aussies who go (nearly said “come”) to Europe).


 * Angles I think are interesting beyond architecture are –
 * family background - non-conformists coming to the fore at the beginning of the 19th century is an interesting social phenomenon – that’s why I think it useful to include the Freshfield connection. (Some of this stuff takes me straight into Dickens). Also some Blackett descendents seem to be comparably remarkable for their strength of character.
 * religious trends – An interesting 18th/19th century whirlpool - Blackets seem almost to have covered the spectrum, and according to your account religion was important to ETB
 * non-achitectural skills – that he built clocks and was apparently obsessed with time harks back to his mother’s side (although he wouldn’t have met his grandfather)
 * Regarding Russell – he was a bright scholar as a child (Blue Coat School records) and apparently intended for the church but something went wrong (letter of a brother). He had a timber business (marriage certificate) but this is said to have failed in around 1857. Father Blacket amended his will to put his inheritance in trust for his wife (Probate records) and packed him off to Australia as well (family folklore). However Russell’s son Wilfred Blacket has an entry in the online Australian biography. Incidently I changed Dissenter to Non-conformist because by the 19th century not only was the latter the more normal term, but dissenter had acquired negative connotations of “difficult so-and-sos”, which is why I suspect the word was often applied to Edmund’s father.

Motmit 11:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

G'Day, Mate!
Re yesterdee, t'die, t'morrer, it tallder pends wot cider ther planet yerron! T'die's t'morrer, iznit? Or mebbee snuther die! See James Bond

Seeya! Amandajm 05:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ha! It took me a while to figure out what you're trying to tell me, Amanda.  But I get it! :-)
 * Anyway, I prefer UTC. And I am trying out new methods to inflate my edit counts.....
 * Seeya! --PFHLai 06:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Linking
Given that it looks like you basically incorporated the text of the individual articles into English Gothic, it may be best to convert the individual articles into redirects (possibly to the relevant sections of the main article). This will have the advantage that existing links into Decorated, Perpendicular etc will also then be pointed to the overall article, and if at some point that article becomes too unwieldy, it's simpler to split it back out as recommended by WP:Summary style. For forms sake, it would probably be best to propose a merge on each article, to make sure the article histories are sorted out properly. I believe there are potential copyright implications with simply cutting and pasting text from one article to another, becuase you lose the attributions of the original authors, contrary to the requirements of the GFDL. David Underdown 07:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've listed the articles at Cut and paste move repair holding pen, the procedure's a bit tricky, so it may take a while to sort out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David Underdown (talk • contribs) 08:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Apparently this was actually unnecessary, so I've converted the original articles to redirects, and chagned the redirects taht used to point to the old articles, so they go straight to the new one. Some of these new incoming links could probably do with tweaking as they come from articles which are obviously nothing to do with England.  If you look at the link on the left-hand side of the page, under "toolbox" you'll see that the first is "What links here", if you click on that (whilst on the English Gothic page) you'll see everything that links into the page, and you could maybe sort out the wrong'uns.  David Underdown 15:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Triple crown
Your Majesty, it gives me great pleasure to bestow these triple crowns. May you wear them well. Durova Charge! 05:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Let me add my own congrats. Well done. (I thought I was discreet, in a way, since I've not let on what country I'm in ... but yes, no names, no packdrill).PiCo 05:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Pet poisons FYI
I'm tracking the California fires on KNBC and what should I find? Here's the link: - "50 Common Items That Can Poison Pets," plus further information on some of them. Probably faster to Google the title. May you and yours never need it! Shir-El too 22:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Brosi here
Der Amandajin, I have been so busy with things that I have not had any chance to go back to love of working on Wiki architecture. But I will try to spend a few hours every week doing something. Loved our conversations, and missed them. I piddled around on Alberti this morning. That needs Serious work.Brosi 15:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling
Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Dead ref in Restoration of the Sistine Chapel frescoes
Reference number 6 appears to dead. I can't find a new one anywhere so I thought maybe you could help. I'm trying to fix this because I plan on uploading this article to Veropedia. -- John Reaves 21:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo's hands
I'd be delighted to contribute, though it might not be for a while. You're welcome to have a go at it if it interests you. I'm absorbing heavy doses of antibiotics, and missing some teaching this week. Feeling like this, it's so much easier to play vandal policeman than add new text. But it's great to hear from you. I hope you are feeling better. JNW 02:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Shakespearean Infoboxes
I would first of all like to apologise greatly for the action that I took to add an infobox to the Macbeth page. I realise now, the sinful errors that I made. I am a new editor and am not too experienced when it comes to editing pages. I thank you for your comment on 'What went wrong' and hope that you can grow to forgive me. I am also rather stupid so I did appreciate your patronising tone as well. I assure you that I will look before saving changes in the future and before saving this page I will try my best to hit the 'show preview' button. Thank you. Wikiadam 20:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling
I've closed this deletion discussion as a keep. Thanks for the offer to help to improve the article. --Tony Sidaway 21:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

da Vinci and The Last Supper
Hi, yeah I tried to format the article in a proper sense, but it just wasn't happening! But I thought the muscial notes stuff about The Last Supper could be of real educational value when you want to talk about da Vinci's amazing genius though the article may be awkwardly long. Thanks. dirty but clean 11:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No issues at all with what ya said, 'tis all perfectly reasonable. After all it could be just another false "Eureka!" moment. Zaniness has no limits among scientists and this could be just one of 'em. Thanks for the reply! dirty but clean 13:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Cathedral architecture of Western Europe
The image was nominated for deletion at (WP:PUI) because the uploader was not the photographer and so had no right to claim the image was in the public domain. This made the image a possible copyright violation and had to be removed. -Nv8200p talk 02:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sistine Chapel Restoration
I just wanted to make sure you're aware that this is going to be tomorrow's daily featured article. Raul654 15:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Congrats
Big hugs on a successful restoration :). PiCo 01:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Me too.--Grahamec 02:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * And me - well done! Johnbod 02:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Bravo! JNW 05:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thannkkyyoouu!
I love you all for the help and encouragement that you give me!...Amandajm 12:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Now the big day is over, at some time I would do a careful check of all changes in a dif covering the whole day. One sneaky vandal moved some dates forward by just 10 years etc, & there will no doubt be other unwelcome changes. What's next? Johnbod 14:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

da Vinci template
Feel free to revise it if you think it is inaccurate. I was just trying to put it together based on what was shown in the article. If I made mistakes, I am sorry and I will try to correct them. Any further suggestions would be most appreciated. Best regards, Remember 13:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Use of image sizes in FAs
You may wish to comment here. Giano 10:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Ceiling
Glad to be of help. I enjoyed reading it, and it was nice to see an article getting the illustrations it deserved. I'm always happy to copy-edit if I have time, but I only dip in and out at quiet times of my day. Just drop me a note if you want anything looked over and I'll get to it if I can. Fictive architecture seems to come up a lot: I've seen it in at least two articles I've copy-edited, and is a common term if you google it. It just needs an article writing.

I think you might be able to damp down those complaints about balance if you add something about the lack of response from the restorers to the criticisms. At the moment it does tend to look as if the restorers' responses have been omitted.

By the way, I think I changed "very varied", as the alliteration drew attention to the weak modifier. Perhaps "varied considerably" if "drastically" overstates it. Andplus 11:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't write articles, or at least I've not yet come across anything that's missing that I have the knowledge or desire to write about. My brother used to do a lot of writing here but got fed up; I came on to see what the fuss was about and got drawn into copy-editing by some articles in need of attention. Andplus 12:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Tapestries
That's all in Raphael Cartoons which i have been expanding - or I can add. I take it you've seen the talk page too? PS I've ticked the box whereever it is that adds pages I edit automatically to my watchlist - which gives you a huge list, but you don't have to remember. Every so often I weed it a bit - very tedious. Oh - I don't know why my comment above came out bold - I didn't mean to shout! I think i'd been support-ing and opposeing just before. Johnbod 13:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * There are several sets - one in the Vatican, one (I think much later - Mortlake 1640s?, although Henry 8 did have one - at Hampton Court) and others broken up to museums. I'm not sure the Vatican one is their original set - one bit of which seems to be in Brescia. Maybe they had to get another after the 1527 Sack. The cartoon article covers some of this, but it was a bit confusing, as I didn't have any of the main books on them. Johnbod 15:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

"Unpleasantness"...
Amandajm, that I intended to "insult" or "put you down" is, to be straight forward, completely wrong. It is unfortunate though that is how the message was apparently received at your end, and I am sorry that it happened that way. I promise to word myself more carefully; some of the comments I do understand conflict with your ideas and were direct. I request that you consider that perhaps my comments that disagree with your WP ideas aren't actually intended as personal insults.

I don't think it's wise to bring up the "personal" aspects on a public talk page (i.e., on the FA talk page) as I have pointed out. Although, if I have done this too, then my apologies. To be honest, your most recent comments there seemed like a "put down" down to me (and a public one), which was a little ironic, I thought in light of your put down list on my page. ;-)

That you are clearly a passionate editor with massive quality contributions under your belt doesn't mean others can't object to, or even change, things that you've done - sorry, i doubt i need to tell you this. What bugged me this time (and a few months back) was your apparent insistence that it was from the start a closed issue and your instruction (demand?) that I not change it. I make a point not to instruct or tell editors what to do (it just gets up peoples noses), but state my opinion (directly sometimes) and at worst recommend action. IMO, instruction/demands to other editors is a "superior stance" thing, which you mentioned on my talk page and not "pleasant". :-)

Anyway, for me, it's pointless going over the "personal" bits anymore, and I'm not in the right frame of mind for discussion yet about pic sizes. Hopefully we get along better next time. Cheers and happy editing. --Merbabu (talk) 04:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Restoration POV
Thanks for flattering me by asking my opinion, but this is not a subject I feel competent enough in to have a useful opinion. PiCo (talk) 10:37, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * In response to your request, I have added a few thoughts on the Restoration talk page. I think it is an excellent article. Best wishes, JNW (talk) 15:00, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Diapered
I'm happy to agree with you that diaper is a correct description of the pattern of windows set in a diagonally hatched pattern (and I love learning new stuff - thanks!). But I've undone your undo because I don't agree that it's either clear or correct to describe the shape of a pane of glass as "diaper-shaped" I consider that equivalent to describing a semi-circle as "wave-shaped" - a component part of a pattern isn't the pattern. Perhaps the current usage of the word isn't accurately reflected in diapering or wiktionary? Anyway, if I remain wrong (A distinct possibility, I'm sure, please rather than "undoing" my edit, replace "diamond-shaped" with " diaper-shaped ".

If "diapered" really needs to be in that article, a better spot would be as follows:

The development of diaper windows was in part due to the fact that three regular diamond-shaped panes could be conveniently cut from a piece of Crown glass, with minimum waste and with minimum distortion.

or similar.

--Psud (talk) 11:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I've updated Architectural glass to match my suggestion above; google image search for "diaper latticed window" shows the right sort of thing, so it is a correct usage when phrased as above (but not diaper-shaped). I've linked the word "diaper" to diapering (which surprisingly has nothing to do with equipping a baby with a nappy) and updated diapering to include the use of the term in reference to windows. --Psud (talk) 08:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Re my (lack of) user page - can't be bothered - one day I might whack in a few user boxes. By the way, it's Psud, rather than Spud - a mistyping of Pseud, short for polysylabic_pseudonym (a name I took up when discovering my usual (monosylabic) pseudonyms were taken when trying to sign up for a yahoo group). --Psud (talk) 08:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Pronouncing my name: something like "sud" (as in soap sud), but with a somewhat silent P at the beginning. I grok "Spud" - am Australian. Good name for a dog ;) --Psud (talk) 09:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

A barnstar

 * A fine effort indeed - i wanted to get in congratulate, but was beaten to it. Looong, well-referenced, and very nicely written. Btw, it seems you write the whole article off wiki and upfront. Interesting. I write in dribbles across dozens of articles - not very focussed. Last year I started Indonesian Architecture (yes, very different to your interests) but it is still light on info, references, and photos. The grand plan was to write this "mother" article, and then split into far more detailed sub articles. I got some of them started like Tongkonan, Omo sebua, and pendopo.
 * Nice photos too!--Merbabu (talk) 22:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Have you thought of suggesting an interesting fact from it for Did you know? on the main page? It's certainly good enough! There is a time limit from creation, though. Thanks! Bob talk 22:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Blacket
I'll try and run through some more today. I switched away from transported for precisely that reason; it would normally be fine, but in this context it conjured up images of shackles and stolen bread which were hard to reconcile with a style of architecture. It is more poetic though, and I do like to see articles written for the reader rather than for a style guide. Anyway, I don't suppose the average reader will notice or care, so no worries.

I am a complete dunce when it comes to architecture, so it is likely that I'll switch more terms for their easier sounding relatives later on. Just take it as a sign they need linking to an article.

As for the drought, I'm not quite so naive. I really meant that the sentence could be expanded to show the indirect connection between the drought and the lack of funds; at the moment it appears somewhat as if the money evaporated, although looking at it again, you've already mentioned the economic depression in connection with the drought, so perhaps elucidation at that point is not necessary.

Don't worry about the spots on your apples it's just apple scab, harmless to humans. It is supposed to decrease fruit yields, but the trees in our orchard are covered in it and I can't imagine that they could produce any more fruit. Andplus (talk) 10:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I meant to check Surry before I saved. Tsk, sorry. Anyway, it wasn't so much I didn't know what a great hall was, but that from the description, I couldn't envisage how it was incorporated into the building. The façade is broken by two gabled bays to the left, and one to the right, the right side of the building terminating in the Great Hall. - did this mean that there is only one gabled bay to the right because the great hall sits in the position that would have been occupied by the second bay? Or there is one massive gabled bay inside of which is the great hall? Or are the two not really related? Faux-Gothic or Gothic inspired for the Gothick? I think I understand what broaches are now. Perhaps an article on them? Andplus (talk) 15:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Nativity etc
In response to your message on my talk page: yes, I am for real. Unfortunately, edit summaries don't allow for a detailed discussion of the issues, and I didn't think it worth going to the talk page, but let me try and explain here a bit more. I wanted to make clear that it's important to emphasise that there are two different nativity stories, and while most of us have been taught to see them as one story, a widespread scholarly view is that they are not just different, but contradict each other on important points. The fact that there are two different stories, rather than a core story with some different details (as in the resurrection story in the Synoptics) is one reason (I did say, "a key reason", not "the key reason") why they are seen as wholly invented, rather than as accounts of a real event which have been redacted and embroidered. The contradictions between the stories are not as trivial as you suggest, but if you read Raymond Brown's Birth of the Messiah - he was a Catholic priest as well as a highly regarded scholar - you'll find a much more nuanced view of the implications of this than the "either it's rubbish or totally true" approach. Rbreen (talk) 12:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Amanda, thanks for your response - to the first part I don't think I really can answer; all I know is that there exist a wide range of beliefs, based on a wide range of understanding of the facts. The more I read, the more I realise how complex people's understanding can be. As to the second part - yes, I was thinking that the current state of the article is a very poor summary of these scholarly points of view. If I can find time to add some decent referenced points, I will. Rbreen (talk) 13:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Cathedrals
I've only given it a quick scan so far, but it looks well up to the usual standard. Mine would be this, although I don't think I've ever been in it. Johnbod (talk) 15:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Good Article Nominee
Hello Amandajm! An article you have significantly expanded, Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England has now been placed at the good article nominations page. I just wanted you to know, I will be reviewing this article but will not be able to leave comments there until at least 18:00 hours (GMT). Your co-operation is appreciated. Regards, Rudget . talk  16:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've completed the review earlier than I thought. It was a pass! Well done.

Princess Beatrice article
Just a quick note to thank you for rearranging the pictures in the article. Much appreciated–I can never get them organised correctly! Thank you also for your kind recommendation at WP:GAN. With best wishes, PeterSymonds | talk  21:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Cathedrals
I did add it to the ...

as a featured article. Again, well done. Will you be working on any like articles that Wikiproject Anglicanism could help you with? -- SECisek (talk) 09:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


 * They cycle through at random, reload the page until it come up - or click here and scroll to the bottom to see the selection.


 * What's next? -- SECisek (talk) 10:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

If we get to work on anything that might intrest you I will let you know, you do the same. The individual English cathedral articles could all use work. Canterbury Cathedral perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secisek (talk • contribs) 11:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Nativity
Yes, I just dumped it on Gospel of Matthew, which seemed more appropriate - I think I decided that after the edit summary removing it, so maybe the trail went dead. An article would be an excellent idea - eventually it could stand on its own, but it could start as a section there - as you like. I'll keep an eye out. The main iconography stays pretty consistent, as we know, but there are some apocryphal flourishes like the midwives in earlier versions. Johnbod (talk) 14:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * They figure in the apocrphals, with their own miracle (Salome's withered arm). They are also usually characters in the mystery plays - do you know these? Well worth looking at - good texts online. It's partly they can keep talking whilst the actual birth goes on (behind a curtain I expect). Often Joseph has trouble recruiting them & in at least one ("N-town" ?) tells Mary not to look so cheerful as he has been laying it on about her difficulties & they might go home again.  Many representations in Gothic art were greatly influenced by these (and vv of course).  I just did a bit on Saint Joseph in art btw.  Johnbod (talk) 15:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Spiffier triple crown, new awards available
Hi, I've been sprucing up the triple crown awards. Here's the new version of the standard triple crown you've already earned. Feel free to replace your old one with this if you like the new version better. I've also introduced two new triple crown awards for editors who've done a lot of triple crown work: the Napoleonic and Alexander the Great edition awards. If you're active in a WikiProject, check out the new offer for custom WikiProject triple crowns. I'll make those upon request if five or more editors qualify. See User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle for more information. Thanks for your hard work, and cheers! Durova Charge! 22:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, saw your comment and I'm heading over to Photoshop to fix it. Is there any problem with the other two crowns?  No offense intended.  In my part of the world these images just look like excellent graphic design, and the Commons files aren't always clear about which versions are current and which are historical.  The metaphor of serving Wikipedia seemed apt at the time, but I certainly didn't mean to do a hot appropriation.  I'll replace and post alternate versions on the talk page.  Please keep in touch.  Best regards,  Durova Charge! 21:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hope the new version is an improvement (hit refresh if the chance doesn't show). Best regards,  Durova Charge! 21:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thought I'd better leave a fuller explanation since your reaction indicates that I'm doing hot appropriations unintentionally. My own country has no laws for this topic other than copyright and our customs aren't sensitive to the protocol issue. I'm doing my best to understand your perspective in terms of the discretion I would exercise with a Kokopelli or an eagle feather. It's hard for me to perceive what gives offense and what doesn't. So to use historical symbols from a country that no longer has royalty (such as France) seems to give no offense, but to use historical symbols from a country that still has royalty does give offense? I've downloaded a variety of heraldic crowns now and am getting set to alter each one for award purposes so that it's no longer specifically a symbol of anything. Would that be acceptable? Please accept my ignorance in good faith and let me know how to conform to your customs. I just want to encourage good editing and don't mean any harm. Best regards, Durova Charge! 16:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo Voyager refference
Hi! In case you didn't see in his discussion thing, I wrote up some stuff from the episode awhile back, and it's all here: http://www.deviantart.com/download/68193920/Concerning_flight_by_NemFX.rtf —Preceding unsigned comment added by NemFX (talk • contribs) 17:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Rorke's Drift
Hi Amandajm.

It's OK to revert the image of the painting if you feel it's over-sharp - as you say it's difficult to get an image of a painting that 'looks right' on all monitors. Regards, Ian Dunster 15:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Amanda.

if you upload over the top, you can't get the earlier state back again. - actually you can! - just click on the (revert) link and the over-sharp version will be reverted back to the previous one.

No, I haven't seen the original - if I ever get to NSW (New South Wales?) I'll be sure to seek it out - I have relatives in Perth but I think that's WA! Actually, speaking of Rorke's Drift I used to live in Chiswick, West London, and didn't know until recently that Frederick Hitch was buried in a churchyard there!

BTW, I am indeed a Goon Show/Goodies/Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy/Monty Python fan - poor me! - Nurse! - the screens! - LOL!

I think you were right about the Fleur-de-lis - it's still in use. I wouldn't have said that using it might cause offence but then again, you never know these days. Regards, Ian Dunster 21:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi again Amanda.


 * I could upload another version of the picture but that might look wrong to you as well.


 * I used to watch The Goodies every week - Graeme Garden and Tim-Brooke Taylor often used to bemoan the lack of re-showing the programme on here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/comedy/clue.shtml - you can listen to it using RealPlayer - I think you'll like ISIHAC! I think I remember them saying not long ago that after all this time there are now videos of The Goodies out so you may be able to get them in Aus. Ian Dunster (talk) 18:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Raphael
By all means, though i'm still at the early stages, as you can see. I was annoyed when some idiot tried to reassess it as a B when clearly it was a start. I've also picked it from the The Core Contest we can fight over how to split the money later! Johnbod 15:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll give you a shout when the main assembly is done & we get to polishing. I tend to keep reaaranging things until then. I'm not taking the contest seriously as there are some postgrads who actually want the money involved, but I saw it on the list & as I was doing it anyway, thought I'd enter. Let me know when Nativity hits the streets. Johnbod 14:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I've finished the main work here, so comments welcome. Johnbod (talk) 10:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I now, a tad reluctantly, tend to leave pictures unsized, which seems to be the policy now - I find people go round removing the sizes anyway - I'm sure you've seen a bit of that. The results can be odd though, especially with narrow vertical ones. Johnbod (talk) 12:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Nighty night! Johnbod (talk) 12:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Just seen this current thread - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts - you should chip in. Johnbod (talk) 11:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Libyan Sibyl
I replied on my talk page. Let's continue there... --VegitaU (talk) 23:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I submitted the image for edit on the graphic lab. They came up with the image on the right.[[Image:Michelangelo the libyan.jpg|right|100 px]]
 * What do you think? -- VegitaU (talk) 04:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Nativity in art
Is this on the way? Johnbod (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow - talk about rabbits from hats! I'll be along some time to add an iconographic descant, but great start! (Though er, "Dark Ages"?). Raphael is finished-ish, btw, if you want to tinker. Johnbod (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Not if WikiProject Middle Ages catch you at it! Johnbod (talk) 22:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Great - I've searched through Commons Category:Illuminated manuscripts by century up to the 12th, and through all (I think) the icon cats - slim pickings; we just don't seem to have a painted Byzantine Nativity at all. I don't think there are any Celtic or Insular depictions at all (they just don't exist I mean), but there are German ones from Carolingian on - though the pics up now may be the earliest we have.  I haven't looked at reliefs.  Johnbod (talk) 22:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

There are a good few later ones at Chaperon (headgear) btw Johnbod (talk) 22:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm done now, for tonight. Btw, I see there are 2 commons cats (or more than) - Nativity, and nativity in art (a sub-cat of the first). Johnbod (talk) 00:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'd agree, but don't lets cut anything yet. It's starting to look good now. I think there might be room for some by subject galleries too - flight, adoration etc, to go in the "scope" section. Or by technique. I still have more text to add, and some pics should go up to the main text - we need a couple of stunners to the top. We should enter this for DYK - 5 day limit from start, as you recall. It won't be finished, but we should aim for a tidier version by then. Maybe roll up the cribs etc into a "popular" gallery. Johnbod (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Very glad you approve - I wasn't too happy with the Rubens either. Maybe the 2nd pic should not be C17 like the first, & also all reddish. But it's amazing how few good scans of good pics we have on this subject. Lot's wife is a type of the magi see here but I'm sure you're right about other bits of the window. Johnbod (talk) 15:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes it's nice, isn't it. I'm thinking of adding a further row of int gothic/early netherlandish, as that really was the heyday of the nativity pic, as the christmas card makers know. I reset the Ter B to 300, as that is my default, so 220 made it look smaller. I now edit & read at 300, but occasionally check an article at 180 to see how the unregistered viewer sees it. You reset your " my preferences" (top of the page - "files" tab).  But I now hardly ever  set at less than 300. Johnbod (talk) 01:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I know what you mean, but a lot of them are registered - someone has to write all those pokemon & game articles - and are probably more switched on to setting preferences than us old folks. Johnbod (talk) 03:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I'm very touched. I "have it in mind" (as the Palace says) to do a New Years Honours List myself! I'm very pleased with the way the Nativity's come out.  Now we must brace ourselves for the "improvements".  Johnbod (talk) 11:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Fra Angelico
Well, thanks for not taking out the box, despite your anathema towards it. --JaGa (talk) 18:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I looked into this before I put the image up in the first place. I saw nothing that theorized it could be Thomas Aquinas.  It makes sense that Signorelli would put Angelico in the mural, since he was finishing Angelico's work in Orvieto. If you have a portrait you'd prefer, please upload it in its place. But I think it's important to have an image of the artist in the article. --JaGa (talk) 07:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I searched for Fra Angelico portrait, and found this image used in several articles, and mentioned in an article by the New York Times. I saw nothing that theorized this was Thomas Aquinas or anyone else for that matter.  Regardless, since Signorelli was never quoted saying "That was Angelico I put in there!" there can be dispute.  And of course, a self-portait from Angelico himself would be better.  Frankly, I think this has more to do with your dislike for infoboxes than anything else.  But, if it will put this to rest, I'll look at the purported self-portait and put IT in. --JaGa (talk) 08:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW, check out this. This is not some random website, this is a book from the largest Catholic publisher in the United States. --JaGa (talk) 08:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm interested in using this image, but what is there to back up its authenticity as a self-portrait besides the St. Dominic tradition? --JaGa (talk) 09:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I liked the crucifixion one too, but the head shot is too small. Could you show me where this info about the new beatification icon is? I couldn't find it. --JaGa (talk) 10:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd be fine with using it, but I don't see anything that says it is definitely a self-portrait. The image that's currently up is by far the most commonly used to depict him, and considering it's used in that "New Saints and Blesseds of the Catholic Church" book I'm having a tough time believing it is incorrect. Still, we can use a St. Dominic image - but we should hold it to the same standards as the Signorelli. Are these St. Dominic images documented as Fra Angelico self-portraits? --JaGa (talk) 18:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. I have to say, considering all the authorities that consider that image to be Angelico, and further considering that the image is on the cover of Gilbert's book, surely that has to be him. But the St. Dominic images are probably him as well - but there should be some confirmation beyond tradition. You'd think, considering how he was revered in his day, the church would have a portait or drawing of him somewhere.  But oh well, I suppose it would have been unbecoming for his position.


 * Either way, if you want to swap the images, I won't object, as long as something is there. --JaGa (talk) 08:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Árchives
What happened to your archive? Did you decide not to use it? Or is there a technical problem? PiCo (talk) 08:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've moved all your talk up to late October to Archive 1 - just a cut-and-paste. If you want to return any of it to this page, just cut/paste it back (the archive icon is up in the top-right corner of this page). For instructions on archiving, hit the Edit This Page tab at the top of this page - there's a link with a title something like "How To Archive", something like that. Cheers PiCo (talk) 12:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Westwork
That's fine. I have no vested interest in the subject. I was just studying the page before a test and made the correction based off my textbook - the 2007 version of Janson's History of Art. It uses the term westwork throughout the text and makes no mention of "west front". The term certainly came from the German word "westwerk" but the text refers to all "west fronts" of the Romanesque and Gothic periods as westworks or west facades; regardless of location. However, I'm not an academic on the subject so I will leave the semantic decisions to others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.81.94.149 (talk) 08:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Here I am!!
Ciao Amanda! How are you? I confess ain't putting much effort in Wikipedia lately, especially in the art sector. I'm finishing my thesis work for my engineering degree, and also I were for two weeks in Syria (nice place! Visit it if you can) where my fianceé lives. But you can ask my help for anything when you want!!! Best hugs from --Attilios (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Your archives
I've fixed your archives, as they were in the "mainspace talk" namespace as opposed to the "user talk" namespace. Your archives can now be found at User talk:Amandajm/archive1 and User talk:Amandajm/archive2 instead of Talk:Amandajm/archive1. Thanks! :) Acalamari 22:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Chartres cathedral at Gothic architecture article
I still think the picture of Chartres Cathedral from the south should be presented with the opening 2 pictures. It is in high quality of an important structure and gives an overview of Gothic cathedral and flying butresses and rose window from the outside. I believe it will fit nicely below the picture of the interior. Thus, the 3 pictures will represent the 3 important aspects of Gothic cathedrals: facade, interior and exterior.  M ath K night  Gothic Israeli Jew 17:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Las Meninas
Hi, this is headed for FA, & it's been asked if there is a ref for the long bit here? Johnbod (talk) 10:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice work. Ceoil (talk) 14:45, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The zones you wrote about are close to the horizontal sevenths Clark mentions.Clark. Ceoil (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

... and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest...


May you and yours have all the best of this Season's Greetings: a


 * Very Merry Christmas


 * and a


 * Happy New Year.

Shir-El  too  00:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Best wishes!!!
Ciao Amanda!! I see how, properly, you're working on the Christmas lights article... honestly, I seem the introduction is truly US-biased, as if they're used only in that country!!! Hope you'll provide a more international point of view about the theme... Apart this, I make you my compliments for you thouroughly and impressive work as usual, and wish you Merry Christimas and Happy New Year. --Attilios (talk) 10:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to You too!
Hi Amanda. Thanks for the kind thought! - I hope you have a wonderful Christmas and New Year as well!

It's freezing here in the UK ATM and I suspect where you are it's sweltering! - LOL! - so have a nice summer too! Regards, Ian Dunster (talk) 10:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Christmas from me too! (PS I've squeezed in another row in Nativity of Jesus in art, useing the Rest above, now better categorised) Johnbod (talk) 11:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

And all the best to you, too, Amandajm. Have a very happy new year! Mega cheers, JNW (talk) 12:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

A Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you too!
Thanks for the Christmas and New Year greetings! I hope you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New year as well! :) Acalamari 18:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

... and a Happy New Year!
Actually we celebrated Hanukkah three weeks ago - thank you for the thought anyway. BTW what is the "Gong"? Happy revels, Shir-El   too  19:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ditto
Thank you! Happy Holidays to you, too! May everything be great in two thousand and eight! Happy editing! --PFHLai (talk) 02:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your kind comments, which are of course reciprocated, Many thanks again for your great work on great great great uncle Edmund. I have been following your further progress with much interest and was inspired by your efforts to do a make-over on Walter Savage Landor - though probably not to quite the same standard. All the best Motmit (talk) 19:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

And happy holidays to you too!
(reflecting the sentiments of all above well-wishers) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psud (talk • contribs) 11:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
Thanks for the greeting! Hope you're having a great holiday season. I've edited the Libyan Sibyl image, adding the mauve back to her garment. Let me know what else needs to be changed so we can replace all images by that one. Well, thanks again. -- VegitaU (talk) 05:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

And Happy New Year
Skyrockets, etc., added to my salutation above. JNW (talk) 01:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Wish you a merry new year
Ciao!! --Attilios (talk) 18:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Those Meninas
Hi Amanda, it's good stuff, but I expect lack of cites will be an issue. I might be able to pull some more about composition out of Lopez-Rey and K. Clark (although at this point I can't wait to work on something else), but you might also want feedback from those who have contributed so much to the entry in terms of content and copyediting, like Ceoil, Johnbod, and Noetica. And please stay away from the fireworks warehouses. You remember what happened in Delft. Best wishes, JNW (talk) 03:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

More Season's greetings
Sorry not to reply sooner, but I was up at the in-laws outside York for much fo the time with no internet access. The chance to spend Christmas morning in the Minster does rather make up for that lack though! David Underdown (talk) 13:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Check needed
Ciao Amanda! How are you? Can I ask you to check my new articlse of Monastero di San Salvatore (Brescia) and San Paolo Maggiore, Naples? In particular, I don't know the English equivalent of "tiburio". Ciao, good work and thanks as usual. --Attilios (talk) 17:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * WOW! Thanks much for your help as usual. Good work!! --Attilios (talk) 00:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Robert Peake the Elder
Your edits are much appreciated. Your instincts on where the massess of the article needed to be rearrangedt were correct. I had actually thought of asking you to help, but I didn't know if a humble mechanical like Peake would be up your street. I must say it is so good to see the number of people interested in art articles growing. My background is a history degree and an obsession with drawing and painting, but I lack a history-of-art background, and I feel that lack here all the time. All the best. qp10qp (talk) 01:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've not heard that theory, but I am all for muddying the waters, as the waters are indeed very muddy in this period. The one at the Met has Harington's name in the title, though. Essex would certainly have been about the right age, and he rather fell out with James over his divorce and took arms against Charles I, so it's possible that the Harington arms were added to cover up his depiction with the family (they do seem a bit out of kilter with the composition). Hearn says the Haringtons probably commissioned the paintings from Peake, though I've not seen any documentary evidence of that. But Hearn has written on Lucy Harington and so is a good source. Also, she references Strong, who wrote a book about Henry (I must read it). I note that the pictures can be traced back to Wroxton Abbey, which was in a member of the Harington family's hands by 1680. Do what you think best. qp10qp (talk) 04:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This is his sister Lucy. qp10qp (talk) 05:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Ha, ha, indeed. You've spotted what was staring me in the face all along and yet the penny didn't drop. It's as plain as day that the boy is different in each version, yet cognitive dissonance prevented me from grasping that. So Hearn is talking about the New York one, with Harington; and the queen's one is called "Henry, Prince of Wales, in the hunting field". qp10qp (talk) 05:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Brilliant detective work by you there! And now we have some more by PKM, (see the talk page).


 * By the way, I don't believe everything I read about Essex. I think he had to agree to the divorce on those grounds owing to pressure from above (King James's favourite, Carr, wanted to marry Essex's wife, and James backed him up). It was about the only grounds that would have been actionable. qp10qp (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello Amandajm, I've granted rollback rights to your account. The reason for this is that, after a look through some of your contributions, I can trust you to use rollback correctly (i.e. to revert vandalism, but not to revert good-faith edits or to edit war). If you don't want rollback, I will remove it. Best wishes. Acalamari 01:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome for the rollback! :) Acalamari 17:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Australian Shepherd
It would appear that the box has been enlarged and other things added that I initially placed there. I would not have duplicated facts already in the the taxo box. I also noticed that it was vandalized after original placement. The box has been removed with most of the info occurring in the article. Noles1984 (talk) 15:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

On Spelling
You have messaged me about the corrections I made to spelling in the Da Vinci article. For what reason do you think the article is best suited in what you call English English? I think you will agree that it is not an article about the UK or its Commonwealth, nor is it about a specifically European subject, as art is universal. Certainly, the English have no greater claim to Leonardo than do the Americans. If you could clarify for me what you view as a specifically European subject in the context of art, I would be most beholden. Until then, I shall see your complaints as unfounded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pentium1000 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC) So, were I to correct the spelling throughout the article, it would be alright? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pentium1000 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC) I am with much sincerity hoping that you gave to the Gothic architecture article a timely completion. Also, I am hoping that you are not taking offense at the message above yours on my page, as it is not my writing and the culpability lies not with me. Thanking you. Pentium1000 (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Leonardo questions
Hi Amandajm, thanks for your feedback. You're right, of course, that was a little harsh. My apologies and thanks for pointing it out, I will try to do better in the future. Best, Gwernol 21:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Not a Typo
Lol, cool. I may well do that. :-) Dave Crosby (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, the special relationship at its best. Oh how that must make you chuckle. - Dave Crosby (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Australia Day
Firstly, my apologies for causing you distress. We were editing at the same time, I encountered an edit conflict, I checked out your changes and they didn't seem to conflict with mine, so I cut and pasted the whole (amended) section. No harm was intended, but these things sometimes happen.

Just one thing. "Please don't waste my time" suggests you're not quite familiar with Assume good faith. It's well worth a read. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 14:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Apologies sentAmandajm (talk) 03:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Old New Synagogue
Hi Amanda, I have done a spot of editing on this, and just thought that given your knowledge of architecture it might be of interest, should you wish to expand upon what's there. Best regards, JNW (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Noah
Thank you for you kind comment. Paul B (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank You For Writing Cathedral architecture of Western Europe
I found the article very interesting and it certainly achieves the purpose of being an article for beginners as you indicated. I chose to translated it into Thai as สถาปัตยกรรมการก่อสร้างมหาวิหารในยุโรปตะวันตก! and evidently it was good enough to be chosen as Featured content. So my thanks to you for all the hard work. --Mattissa (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I did read about your withdrawal from being selected for the 'Gold star' . It is unfortunate really because I think it is a very informative article and looks at architecture from religious/historical perspective which I am interested in.  There were some suggestions prior to the translation being accepted too, that it should be a comparison of characteristics of architecture among different countries rather than architectural styles --comments which I totally disagreed with.  I think that architectural styles in western Europe have more to do with architectural characteristics of the periods rather than geographic differences.  It is true that local characteristics have some influences but not enough to warrant a unique school of architecture.


 * Galleries! you can't get rid of those.  I can imagine what the same people might say if they saw what I did to your article when I took the liberty of adding a few more images in particular in those sections where you analyzed representations of churches from different countries.  I tried to illustrate points that you made by using images. I think those images are the heart of the matter especially for people that come from different cultural backgrounds and many more who do not have access to those places mentioned.  In order to translate your article, I had to translate at least 20 other articles in order to have good references.  Unfortunately, we are still quite thin in this area.


 * Actually, I have been looking at your article Gothic Architecture that you suggested I take a look at for quite some time and really really want to do it but there was a short article written in my language already. If I am to translate, I may have to remove most of the existing contents that do not sit too well with what you wrote.  I am not sure how the originator would feel about it although this is supposed to be up for grabs!


 * Anyway, there is plenty more good stuff that you produced that I would like to share with others. Have you considered writing about how political situations affected architecture (both positively and negatively) like the Black Death, the Thirty Years War, religious reformations up to WWII and the decline of religious followers in the 20c including the internal struggle in a given church between those that are responsible for the chancel or those that are responsible for the nave.  I do not have the knowledge to write this myself.


 * Thank you again and please keep up the good work. Cheers. --Mattissa (talk) 11:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Wells Cathedral
Hi, I see you have been doing great things with cathedral architecture - would you be kind enough to look at Wells Cathedral which was unreferenced 24 hours ago & I've expanded, as I'd like to get this to GA.&mdash; Rod talk 15:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Cologne Cathedral
Spoken like another true article owner. You people get around, no? Roncalliplatz isn't mentioned in any Cologne-related articles, not least the cathedral's, so I was remedying that. If, as you imply, it isn't notable, then there's a process in place to demonstrate that. I'd put it in the "See also" section, but I'm not sure how you'd react to that. - Dudesleeper | Talk  12:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry not to get back sooner. I notice that the page on Roncalliplatz has now been deleted by another independent editor who didn't think it was notable. I can only repeat my suggestion that you include a bit more info that it is considered notable. If the article still existed, then a see also link would be a good way to go. Amandajm (talk) 07:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Your removal of animation link on Leonardo
I disagree and think this is a major new development that should go on the main Leonardo page as well as the others you moved it to. Can you please justify the deletion? I don't want to simply revert but just feel you are wrong. thanks Peter morrell 20:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks for your very comprehensive reply; well done. cheers Peter morrell 06:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Leonardo
Do you know the reason for the bizarre footnote format? There is no reason for the numbers before the letters and I haven't seen it anywhere else.--Grahame (talk) 02:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've changed by getting rid of the # and inserting an extra carriage return. There is an alternative "more modern" system of "content notes" used in Che Guevara using  and , but I don't see any particular reason to change it.--Grahame (talk) 06:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you intending to take this back to FAC? I notice you catch plenty of flack without going near FAC.--Grahame (talk) 12:50, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I would put it up and I suspect it will go through this time. Mind you, some people put up articles on trivial matters constantly until they go through, sometimes on the 5th attempt over 3 or 4 months.  Of course, it is the important articles that gain the most attention.--Grahame (talk) 00:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

There's a world beyond Western Europe Amanda.
I believe, you will remember about it someday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.158.196.110 (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah mate! I come from a land about as far beyond Western Europe as you can get.


 * Having written Cathedral architecture of Western Europe, I am now waiting for someone like you to write Cathedral architecture of Eastern Europe. But you don't! All you do is whinge, contradict and level insults. And you do it without either naming yourself or citing your sources.


 * Why do you have this expectation that I, from my distant vantage point of Australia, will research and write about the Architecture of Eastern Europe? If I was writing about Life on Mars, would you expect me to write about blinking Life in Eastern Europe?


 * NOTE: That is Australia as in Oz-tray-lee-ya, not Austria as in Österreich, which is a different place entirely.


 * Amandajm (talk) 08:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah!
 * If accept your arguments the article about Romanesque architecture should have title Romanesque architecture of Western Europe. In this article there's is only one picture of the building from other country than Western European. That what you did suggests that there is no Romanesque buildings in other parts of Europe. If you agree I will willfully write Romanesque architecture of Eastern Europe.


 * There are also no informations about purist reconstructions of the buildings in Germany and France bay so famous people like Eugène Viollet-le-Duc or Friedrich von Gärtner which is now often criticized for transmitting Romanesque buildings to not medieval forms. How should I call it? Duping of people that they are looking on original buildings? I hope not.


 * You’ve completely captured this article and You remove all changes you don’t like. What else than insulting you can I do?


 * NOTE: Even the "stupid people in Eastern Europe" know where Australia is. But the "western history" of Australia starts in 1768 and You show me, You think there are no other history than Western European before this date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.109.212.36 (talk) 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I notice you have shifted computers again!
 * Well, if you are not totally stupid, why can't you work out that I get my information from the books that I have available in a place that it 8,000 miles from Eastern Europe. And if you are not stupid, can't you remember that Eastern Europe was closed to Western European scholars for quite a number of years?
 * If you want Eastern Europe written about, in English, then locate and translate the sources yourself, but stop bullying me about it.
 * Why is it that you continually fail to take up the challenge to actually write an article about the reconstruction of Germany's building to a more purist style?
 * I try to be careful in what I portray. If the "exterior profile" of the building in question has indeed been greatly altered, as you claim, then I cannot find written evidence to support that. (It is only its profile that I have commented on in the caption.)
 * As for the fact that there is only one pic from Eastern Europe- I have tried to find photos of the finest buildings, regardless of their country of origin. Some buildings, like Durham Cathedral and Les Hommes, Caen, demand inclusion because they are superb examples of the architecture of the period.
 * You started complaining the moment I began work on the article, even though two experienced editors who are major contributors had both request/suggested that the article needed extensive upgrading.
 * So far, you have added nothing to the article yourself, except the repeated statement that the German buildings have been rebuilt. Doesn't it ever occur to you that the "purist" 19th century reconstructions were based on the pre-existent and often magnificent examples of Romanesque architecture present in Germany? And that this is why Romanesque was seen by the purists as a truly Germanic style?


 * You continually offend me by suggesting I am insular. This is not the case. When it comes to Eastern Europe, I am almost entirely ignorant. And, as I have tried to point out to you, being in Australia, it is hard to rectify that situation.
 * If you have looked at the edits I have made over the last couple of years, you might realise that I have a working relationship with Attilios, who is not a native English speaker. He writes or translates articles from Italian and I tidy up his English and add from my knowledge of the buildings or observation of the pictures. I am prepared to tidy up or correct anything that you translate from Polish or some other language, if it is not in very good English. All you have to do is drop a note on my page.
 * Now please get off my page and go and do some serious, researched, cited work on some aspect of Eastern European art or architecture.
 * Amandajm (talk) 10:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * O yeah!
 * Apologize for my dynamic IP. I'm really trying to have the same but as "totally stupid" person from Eastern Europe" I'm not able to get it.
 * Suppose I’m not stupid, and You are right that Eastern Europe was closed to Western European scholars for quite a number of years. If we take this point of view we should only write about Romanesque Architecture in France and Northern Italy because there are the roots of this style. The same only about Gothic in France because other countries only learn this style.
 * Each country has it’s own Romanesque style. You can of course expecting buildings like Sydney Opera House but the result of such expectations is the other thing. Here you have examples of Romanesque buildings in Eastern Europe. Totally different examples.


 * http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grafika:Tum_tyl.jpg
 * http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A9p:J%C3%A1kitemplom15.JPG
 * http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soubor:Trebic_podklasteri_bazilika_velka_apsida.jpg


 * You must also remember there was no purist reconstructions in Eastern Europe (with some small exceptions) and for example Romanesque church in Trebic from UNESCO World Heritage Site has baroque facade. Such rebuildings where removed during purist reconstructions in Western Europe.
 * The information under the picture of the building about it’s purist reconstructions is lowering of rank but encyclopedic duty. The user must know that this reconstructions can reach errors.
 * Sorry about this "Heil Hitler!" but without it You will not discuss with mi about this article.
 * It’s your choice. You can say: "I’m clever and people from Eastern Europe are stupid slaves" or you can discuss about view on Romanesque architecture. But if You stay with this first point of view, expect only insulations.
 * Now, according to your wish I’m "getting off your page".
 * Best regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.109.212.36 (talk) 12:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * What is this nonsense about "people from Eastern Europe are stupid slaves"? The Eastern Europeans that I have known, personally, have been physicists, lawyers, computer programmers, university lecturers and classical musicians.


 * But you do not seem to understand that in this small city in Australia:
 * I have very little information about Eastern European architecture, in English, and (as I have told you before)
 * I cannot read foreign language websites, so I cannot write about it!


 * Yes, they are pictures of three lovely buildings. I happen to know that the one at Tum suffered considerable damage during the war and was altered in form during its restoration. Now, stop complaining and get on with writing! I have an interesting little Western European project underway and find the interruptions a bit of a bore. Amandajm (talk) 13:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

revertion of article of true cross
Why did you revert the change that I made? I think that the reference to Christians suits the article better than the reference to "traditionally"? What I mean is that some people do not beleave in the fairytale of the bible, so only Christians think that the true cross ever existed. What are your thoughts? --169.232.119.242 (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

True Cross
Read the article! Just a couple of paragraphs further down, it tells you exactly which Christians do or don't accept the "tradition" of the True Cross. It is correct to say that it is a tradition. It is not correct to say that it is a Christian belief, because many Christians don't believe it.

If one writes that something is a "tradition", then it means, straight away, that only some people follow it. Santa Claus is a tradition. Facing Mecca for prayer is a tradition. Wearing a blue garter on your wedding day is a tradition. Throwing coins in the Trevi Fountain is a tradition. They don't have to be your traditions, but they are all traditions.

What you are suggesting is "simplistic". In other words, you are making one simple rule for all Christians. You want to say "Christians believe this...." But it isn't that simple. Christians do not believe the same way about everything. There are some beliefs, the most important ones, that all Chritians believe, (otherwise, they are not Christians). But very particular beliefs, like whether a little splinter of wood really came from the cross of Jesus is not something that every single Christian in the world believes, so it is a big mistake to lump them all together in the first sentence.

What is more, the beliefs of every religious group have to be written about with respect. It is not the part of Wikipedia to judge whether beliefs are right or wrong. Regardless of what an editor may think about a particular set of beliefs, it is OK to say what people believe in. Amandajm (talk) 05:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * All right. How about we write it as "Christian tradition".  This will include your definition of tradition, while also clarifying that the tradition relates to Christians.--169.232.119.242 (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Life of the Virgin
Ok, but it is early days. I want to add User:Johnbod/table -- can you think of other examples - 10+ scenes for which we can ref the subjects. Johnbod (talk) 01:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Done for tonight - great work on San Pedro btw! Johnbod (talk) 03:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * DYK tommorow I expect - are you going to jump in? - some stuff on stained glass would be very handy. See also the offshoot (& rather confusing) Seven Joys of the Virgin, or 5, or 15. Johnbod (talk) 20:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Amanda. The subject of the theology of the Cieling is a bit difficult - Mick makes many "mistakes" (e.g., what's Eve doing under God's arm?), but of course they're not mistakes at all, he meant something, and the question is, what? With Eve one can theorise in a sensible way, but why on earth did he ignore the text of Genesis and have all three sons of Noah looking at their father? I can only imagine that he didn't actually read it - and he had no particular need to, of course.

It wasn't me who ermoved my blog, it was the vigilantes. Hope you enjoyed the Archies. Must have a look at the Leonardo article. PiCo (talk) 16:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Rokeby Venus
Hi Amanda. I have conomed the above Velázquez FAC with Johnbod; and a once over from you would really be appreciated. Thanks. Ceoil (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking of working Mona Lisa to FA if you are interested in collaborating. I watched in dismay your nom of Leonardo da Vinci, this is something I think that needs only cosmetic edits to bring over the line, and would like to help with. Ceoil (talk) 16:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Whenever. There are so many sources to choose from, the potential here is huge. All the best. Ceoil (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Avignon
Well yes the Louvre call it the Pieta of Avignon, but we all know their English translations are done by the mistresses of the Minister of Culture. AP has it among English-speaking art historians. Have a good Easter! Johnbod (talk) 14:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

PS - Did you see Featured_article_review this? Some basic referencing needed to keep as FA, though plenty of scope for improvement too I think. Johnbod (talk) 15:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Ling.Nut/Funerary art
Hello Amandajm,

Funerary art is currently a redirect to Church monument. I'm working on a more global version at User:Ling.Nut/Funerary art. Ceoil (whose name I got from SandyGeorgia) suggested that you might be interested in helping... Ling.Nut (talk) 05:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Gothic Archtecture
Um… I'm confused. I did look at Gothic Architecture yesterday, but I didn't add any pictures. I think I did edit a caption just for proofreading purposes, but that's it.

Just so you know, I am not A.D. Budgie. One username is enough for me.

I wish you luck with the architecture of Eastern Europe, but I'm afraid I don't know much about architecture– that's why I was reading the page. The only eastern cathedrals I can name are St. Basil's and Hagia Sophia.

A. Parrot (talk) 21:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Anti-Pope
Thanks, but that was just the finishing touches on the other guys stuff, picked up at FAC. I was amazed how little there is to add to Category:Medieval European sculptures when I set it up. Know anything else, including cathedrals etc with decent sections on the sculpture? Johnbod (talk) 10:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've embarked on something similar myself. I was going to broaden church monument a bit after the funerary art - Ling Nut has decided he needs to get on with his dissertation, no doubt correctly, so left that to me. But I will be spending rather less time here for a while I think. Johnbod (talk) 18:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Amanda, I have just opened my talk page and I see a Christmas message from you, Many thanks if belated, I hope you had a nice Easter, Malcolm Malcolm Low 20:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malcolmlow (talk • contribs)

Cathedrals
Amanda, thanks for your feedback on my Talk page about cathedrals.

You mentioned something about creating [or contributing to] an article on Eastern European Catherals, similar to the article on Western European Cathedrals. Personally, I think it would be better to merge the two. The reason for this is because the line between Eastern Europe and Western Europe is very obscure. While Russia and Ukraine are clearly in Eastern Europe, and France and Spain are clearly Western Europe, countries like Poland or Greece can fall on either side. It's a very obscure line, and in a way artificial, because the countries in the middle are effectively both Eastern European and Western European.

Even if we try to separate Europe into an eastern and western half along denominational lines (Western Europe would be Catholic/Protestant Europe, while Eastern Europe would be Orthodox Europe), this line is also incredibly obscure. Reason for that is the the "two Europes" have heavily influenced each other architecturally. For example, the Baroque movement -associated with Catholic churches- was imported into Russia and Ukraine in the 17th century, where many Orthodox Churches incorporated a heavy Baroque element into their architecture, most notably in cities like Kiev and St. Petersburg (among many others), sometimes in an even more flamoyant style than what you'd see back in Italy. Baroque influence has also left a strong imprint in parts of Greece, Romania, and Serbia. Another example of cross-denominational architectural influence is Byzantine architecture -usually associated with Orthodox Churches- which has left a notable influence in Catholic areas controlled at one time by the Byzantine Empire, like Italy; a notable example being St. Mark's in Venice. The Byzantine Revival movement (or Neo-Byzantine) has also been popular in Catholic architecture, for example the two most well-known churches in Marseille (Cathedrale de la Major and Notre Dame de la Garde).

Additionally, the very basic layout of the church structure for all of Europe's major Christian denominations (Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Calvinist) has the same roots: early Christianity and the architecture of the Roman Empire. And there have also been pan-European architectural movements for building churches, notably Neoclassical, of which you'll find examples from Finland to Greece, Britain to Russia, and everywhere in-between.

And even within denominations, there is no uniform style. The traditional East Slavic form of building churches (such as St. Basil's in Moscow) is unique to Russia and Ukraine, it's not common in other Orthodox countries; no such church will be found in Greece. Likewise, Gothic tends to be more common in northern Catholic areas, while it becomes less common the further south you go; this phenomenon can be witnessed in France while traveling from north to south, Gothic-style churches become less common as you head towards the Mediterranean coast. Skyduster (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

St Andrews
Hello. Can you tell me where St Andrews Cathedral in Sydney is located. Is it the one near the Town Hall in Sydney and is it open to the public at all times. I think that when I get a chance I will go out and take some interior shots of the cathedral. If poss I will try and outdo the Saint Marys photo that I did previously. I know I can do better than that, its just a matter of using the proper settings. Also I don't know if you saw the reply on my talk page that I left you. Cheers. --User:Adam.J.W.C. (talk) (talk) 00:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for these tips. I might try and head out there within the next few weeks or so and try to take in all of these buildings. I could try and take in some of lead light windows but I am not sure if they will turn out the best but I will give it a go. Once again, many thanks. --User:Adam.J.W.C. (talk) (talk) 23:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bridge opening official booklet.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bridge opening official booklet.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

SMILE


Grandoldman (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend and remember :"All men are created equal, but ambition, or lack of it, soon separates them." Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Gallery
Hello Amanda, I made some final changes to the "new" gallery. I hope you will like it and can use it in the article. Kind regards, Massimo Massimo Catarinella (talk)

Leonardo

 * None of the changes were necessary, of course, I could simply have taken the article to WP:GAR. Please feel free to revert all the changes I made and that's what we'll do if you'd prefer. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 15:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AllSaintsChalfont MCFarrarBell1976sm.jpg}
Thank you for uploading Image:AllSaintsChalfont MCFarrarBell1976sm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:
 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bridge opening official booklet.jpg}
Thank you for uploading Image:Bridge opening official booklet.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:
 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ciao!
Ahoj Amanda! As you can notice, I'm not so much working on Wikipedia since I had to graduate first, and now I'm working at Magneti Marelli at a project for Ferrari car... I just wanna greet you and compliment for your (as usual) good work at Chester Cathedral. Zao!! --Attilios (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Sunflowers
You could have saved both me and yourself quite some time by simply changing "he" with "Goto". Afasmit (talk) 09:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing
Hello, Amanda, good to meet you, and here is Farmer & Brindley with my complements. --Lockley (talk) 07:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sistine Chapel Ceiling
I'm not disputing that at all. Just that the formatting needs work (you can't have a stray sentence explaining the sourcing). Sorry if we clashed, best. Ceoil (talk) 01:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know to be honest. I'm only fully researching the chapel in the last two or three weeks, and I'm not yet up to date on the sources. I'm toying with the idea of tackling the main chapel article, but it seems daunting. Modernist is suggesting that the ceiling might be a more manageable subject on the first outing, and maybe s/he is right. Either way, I'm only skirting around the chapel for the moment, and maybe my edit was a bit hasty. If so I apologise. Ceoil (talk) 01:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with some of what you said - not all - but I wont excuse myself to you and i'm the first to admit that copy editing an article you are close to is, well, difficult. But please don't describe it as B.S! Anyway, if I was to go for the Sistine Chapel would you colleborate. Ceoil (talk) 02:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Amanda, I would be most honored if you had a go! No mercy! Ceoil (talk) 02:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Euf; home sick. I've had my share of that in the last two years, and all I can saw is baaaa....Hope you get back soon ;) Ceoil (talk) 02:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Rorke's Drift
Hi Amanda. Bad luck with the AGNSW photos - how fuzzy are they? - only I may be able to do something with them if they aren't too bad. If you don't want to upload one then send me it via my e-mail link and I'll see if I can do anything with it. Ian Dunster (talk) 08:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * LOL! - OK, that's the trouble with taking pictures in museums, most don't allow flash and so the camera has to use a slow shutter speed - better luck this time! Ian Dunster (talk) 09:07, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Leonardo da Vinci
Hi there,

I agree that it's useful to have a large thumbnail sometimes, for example, when you're providing extensive commentary about a work of art. However, forcing image size for every image in a web page can cause problems. Firstly, there are accessibility issues: users with small displays (e.g. mobile phones, palmtops etc) cannot see the entire image and are forced to scroll left-right to see it, visually impaired users with large text browsers, can end up with long words broken across multiple lines and so on. Secondly, there are so many images in this article that they extend well beyond the body of the text, and into the footnotes. I think this really needs some work, as the article looks very cluttered, and it's hard for people new to the subject to distinguish which of the artist's images are most notable. How about the following compromise?


 * Keep the thumbnails of certain important images (such as the Last Supper) oversized; ideally just the ones which are the subject of extensive commentary.
 * Remove forced sizing of the images which are present just for illustration, such as the statue of da Vinci at the Uffizi Gallery.
 * Rearrange/move/remove forced sizing of images which extend beyond the text of the sections they belong in.
 * Remove a couple of the images from the gallery at the bottom, they look like an afterthought to the article, and there's already a very good gallery on Commons.

Cheers, Papa November (talk) 15:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Good work, it looks much cleaner and easier to follow now! There was a problem with the caption being cut off in one of the images, so I restored it to default size. Papa November (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. Fancy another go at FA at some point?  The article looks quite decent.  What were the main criticisms that arose from the last FAC attempt?  I got a bit lost reading the massive discussion! I've been doing a bit of work on the image pages at Commons in the meantime. Papa November (talk) 10:06, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * FAC isn't the most welcoming of places, I agree. It's also important to remember that the reviewers aren't always right - there's no point in adding daft citations just for the sake of appeasing them.  It's better to politely defend your case and wait for a second reviewer's opinion!  My only criticism of the article is that it's quite long.  Perhaps the list of paintings could be split off into a list article?  The new article could contain a much more comprehensive, illustrated list than the da Vinci article itself... perhaps even a featured list candidate eventually? Papa November (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!.. It still needs attention from someone with more knowledge of the subject than myself - there are a couple of missing images, and other bits of information. The lead might need better referencing too, but once that's done, I'm pretty sure we can get it featured.

Sorry if I was a bit overzealous with the main article, but I think we can trim quite a lot of material if we really focus more on Leonardo, rather than the events and people around him. For example, the Verrocchio's workshop, 1466–1476 section felt like a general discussion of Verrocchio and his workshop, rather than Leonardo's involvement in it, which is why I chopped out a lot of material. Similarly, the Professional life, 1476–1513 section sometimes feels like it's a history of Milan, rather than Leonardo.

I may be away for a couple of days, but I'll be back to help out soon! Papa November (talk) 15:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well then I'm putting a tag on it  C t j f 8 3 Talk 20:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * sorry, but find one of those thousand publications that is reliable, cause if i challenge something it has to be sourced or the tag left on...BTW, I didn't know that portrait was by da Vinci...but i knew the Mona Lisa was  C t j f 8 3 Talk 07:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Be careful abt using youths Donald would have loved for models - or at least make sure you have a valid model release!

I'm still around. Currently working on a book, which is fun - hope to have a useful draft finished by the end of July and then seek a publisher. It's about a boy (well, he was 19) who disappeared in Cambodia in 2004. Quite a painful thing for the parents and they're supporting this in the hope that it might bring some more witnesses out.

How are you going? PiCo (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Romanesque art
Hi Amanda, long time no... I was adding a link to the Metropolitan timeline of art to the above when I discovered the whole article was in fact a copyvio of this, and had been since 2005. I have started from scratch, and unless you have objections, will copy chunks of the Romanesque architecture over there - capitals, stained glass, murals etc - it should not deal with architecture as such, as we have two strong articles on that. I'm not sure how much of this was from your renovation. Hope this meets with your approval, and please add anything on other aspects, or do you know any other good articles on the period - we seem to have very few. Gothic art is also very weak, and although I try to avoid big-label articles, it really needs improving. Hope you are well! Are you still doing the BE? Johnbod (talk) 13:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - at the moment it is little changed, but I will work on it. I don't mind some duplication myself - better that than having 4 different bad accounts of the same thing, as you so often find here! Johnbod (talk) 14:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Leonardo & androgynity
As you know, androgyne literally means "male-female", but what is really looking "female" about these two mentioned paintings? One could maybe name "The incarnate Angel" as an example, because the breast is vaguely resembling the one of a woman, while the figure also has the penis of an adult man. I would generally say the term androgyne is used far too often. Most of the time, a word like angelic would be more appropriate for this kind of look (ignoring the rather modern fashion to depict angels as women....) Fulcher (talk) 18:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Concerning angels: Ironically, I have just recently started a thread about angels in art in this forum: To be honest, I wouldn't really imagine any angel too look like the middle aged Alan Rickman (my "ideal" would be the Serbian angel from Mileseva, who is close to the biblical description: a young male with very long white clothes - beautiful, but not too fragile). I think the idea of a "coyly seductive" look probably comes from the famous story about Sodom, where you get the impression that many of its citizens want to have sex with these angels and I just guess that people in the near east didn't have a much different "taste" than Ancient Greeks or many other people in the past, so the conclusion would be that the reader (especially if he's an Italian artist) imagines these angels to be rather youthful than very virile. Especially since Caravaggio there was a tendency to have a mix of the two most well known winged beings - Eros and the biblical angel. Much later, Goethe joked about their prettyness by making Mephisto "flirt" with them in Faust II. I guess in the more heterosexual orientated late 19th century they wanted to end these kind of interpretations and therefore started to turn these angels into women. Fulcher (talk) 01:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply
Thanks very much for looking at my site Amandajm. I appreciate the thorough feedback, really great! I will take all your points into consideration. I don't know that much about Art, just a few grains about Leo and michel, and this inspires me to do other artists like Bourgereau. Now im conflicted whether to include him haha. I'll fix up the errors, improve the navigation and such, then maybe resubmit to wikipedia.

thank you very much!

Rowen77 (talk) 05:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Issues with the images uploaded by TTaylor@Commons
Hi Amandajm, am I right assuming that you are also TTaylor at Commons? If this is the case, please take a look at your talk page at Commons as for some of your valuable images the license is incorrect and the author is not named. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 21:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi again, please, if you are indead TTaylor@Commons and want to save some of your valuable contributions that were accidently tagged PD-old take a look at your Commons user page. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 06:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Cathedral Infoboxes
Hi there,

I do take your points about infoboxes. However (probably unsurprisingly), I would defend, in principle, the infobox I have added to all the English Cathedrals. The point of the infobox is to summarise, quickly and concisely, some of the content of the article, for people who don't want to wade through the whole article. Therefore, yes, some of the content is repeated in the actual text.

In the specific case of Chester, I can accept all the points you made - it may be overkill, it may have affected the layout etc. But I was doing this mainly for all the poor neglected cathedrals out there without an infobox. And I thought it would probably be better if there was a uniform style of infobox for all the English cathedrals. The infobox is flexible, so it can display as little or as much information as is required. In the case of Chester, it's fine by me to have it as you have now edited it. I could quite happily get rid of the map as well - I'm not really sure what it brings to the party.

I was trying primarily to do something positive for all the Cathedral articles out there - I'm happy to defer to other people on whether it is useful etc. - but I hope you can see what I was trying to achieve!

Cheers, MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 13:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Updated - I just missed your second message before I posted the above. I think 'nonsense' is a little harsh. Of course many English cathedrals are still being modified, or have been extensively restored. I still think you can justifiably put a date when the major work on construction finished - often (but not always) when the building was consecrated. The whole point of that section was to deal with cases; for instance, York, where the cathedral as a 'concept' dates from very early on, but the actual current fabric dates from much later; and where there have been multiple buildings in between. St Paul's is another good example; the building very definitely dates from 1677-1708, but there has been at least 4 previous St. Pauls's cathedrals. What I was trying to do in that section was to provide a quick overview of the material history of the cathedral.


 * Anyway, if there are specific articles where you don't want to turn that section off, you can just remove the 'yes' from the line that says:
 * building             =yes
 * and that section will disappear from the infobox. I am not going to remove it from the template, because in many of the articles, it serves a useful purpose. I will see if I can alter the template so that the architects flow like you suggest however.


 * Cheers, MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 13:50, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've continued to tweak the infobox to try and make it more useful. As I say, the infobox is designed so that it can have as much or as little information as is desired. I've changed the descriptions for the building information so that they are possibly more useful (and so they take less space). A good example of how I envisaged it working (and the circumstances I envisaged using it) is St Paul's Cathedral; you can now see when the diocese was created, how many previous cathedrals there were (in this case very clear cut), and the dates of the current building. I've gone through and removed extraneous information from this section for all English cathedrals, so it is only present where necessary. I still think it serves a purpose - but I'll continue to think how it might be improved.


 * I think what you have to appreciate is that different people want different things in their infoboxes. You don't want to see architectural detail - but some people (ignoring my own opinion) do want to see it. Several different types of infoboxes have previously been added to English Cathedral articles (not by me)- some which give information primarily about the clerics; and some that have more information about architecture. Personally, what I want is to have a uniform style of infobox on all the cathedral articles. What I have tried to do is to provide an infobox which allows any information to be displayed. Which parts of it are actually used is up to whichever people care most about a given article. Consensus should be allowed to run its course on each article.


 * I have no especial interest in displaying the architectural details. I think in some cases it will be useful. You don't, but others might. The regular editors of a given article will decide what information stays or goes, I am just trying to provide a system for the information to be displayed. I don't think a second infobox will help. As specifically regarding Chester, I didn't put the architects into the infobox in the first place - I think it looks a mess, especially since some of them are not even certain. Personally, I think an architect should only be added to the infobox where it is a clear cut case - like Wren at St. Paul's. If you want to remove the architects from the Chester infobox, you have my blessing! MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 13:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amanda!
Your note made me chuckle. It's good to hear from you. It's the middle of the night where I am, and I'm supposed to be up in a few hours to teach, so I'm online hoping to fall asleep while typing.... Bouguereau has never been a favorite of mine, similar with Greuze, where all the admirable draftsmanship is spent on a treacly, if erotic, sentiment. I'm writing a regular column now for publication, analyzing masterworks. It's great fun. More soon...JNW (talk) 07:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Bless you, dear! Like many painters, I work in a near-vacuum, partly by necessity. But the upshot is that one can feel very isolated. I will e-mail you details re: the writing. JNW (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Commas
Actually, both methods are acceptable. See here, for example. A comma can be used between all items in a list or it can be omitted. According to my advanced technical writing textbook called Technical Communication by John Michael Lannon, published in 2006 by Pearson Custom Publishing, on page 765, "Use commas after items in a series, including the next-to-last item." It goes on to give examples: "Helen, Joe, Marsha, and John are joining us on the term project." and "He works hard at home, on the job, and even during his vacation." It also says, "Use no commas if or or and appears between all items in a series." Example given: "She is willing to study in San Francisco or Seattle or even Anchorage."

Therefore, using a comma to separate all items in a list is traditional, at least in MLA style, which is the style in which I write; however, omitting the final comma is also considered acceptable. Also, according to WP:COMMA, either method is acceptable on Wikipedia. Since either style can technically be considered correct, I like to add the comma since I believe lists looks better with its inclusion. Hence, I will continue to add commas to lists in order to improve aesthetics, unless adding the comma would make the sentence ambiguous. Also, in case you want to undo the other comma I added to a list in the same article, I added it here. But, in the end, there are two different list styles and both are acceptable. Thank you for your concern. Useight (talk) 04:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan. I typically avoid editing European article since I write in American English, I just happened to stumble upon that article while writing a paper. We will have to agree to disagree agreeably on this one and it's not really a big deal anyway. Enjoy your evening. Useight (talk) 04:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

SPAM: Content fork about to be spooned
I've stated at LDV's personal life talk that I'm going to redirect and merge back into the parent article as it is a clear content fork. I'll be leaving this notice for all recent editors to the article and its talk page. brenneman 02:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I sincerely hope that the comment about my "understanding of how difficult it is to present a balanced and accurate account" was meant in good faith, and not intended as a personal attack. I may not be an art historian, but I have published a number of papers in high-impact peer-reviewed journals and I certainly know how to present balanced and accurate accounts. Please remember to comment on content, rather than editors themselves. I'll ask for a third opinion on the style issue. Papa November (talk) 12:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Confessions of a wiki-addict
What I said/say on my talk page is true: my ISP is banned, permanently, and I can't do wiki from home. I'm doing this from my favourite cafe, which apparently uses an ISP with a better credit rating.

What I meant by that post on the Leo talk page is that we need to pitch the article to the curious but uneducated reader, Phyllis Stein (cute, eh?) We need to go beyond saying that everyone thought and thinks L was the greatest, and say why. To do that, we need to go into history - L was a master of realism, both representational (only rarely does he get his proportions wrong, and his modeling was superb) and psychological (the Madonna of the Rocks, eg, is so tender and true). That realism was a very large part of his appeal to Vasari and others - they say so, tho not in those words. And we also have to say why realism was regarded as a virtue. What was art like 50 years before Leo? Stiff figures, patterned surfaces, a language of signals that wouldn't be seen again until Picasso and the lads. It's really a matter of what the High Renaissance was all about. We need, finally, to mention a few technical details - the invention of oils and painting on canvas. It was a revolution. Suddenly you could do sfumato - you couldn't with the earlier tempera. Nor could you roll up a fresco and carry it round, the way you could a canvas. It was the laptop revolution of its day. To an extent, Leo then became famous for being famous - everyone said he was the greatest, so he must be. I doubt that this is true - for my money, Caravaggio and Goya are better. But I have florid tastes. And never forget, Phyllis likes the Impressionsists. Her taste stops there.

Does the world need a biography of Donald Friend? Would a publisher commission me? I dunno. My book on Eddie Gibson is done. The lad was a psychopath. Did you know that "psychopath" is a clinical definition of a certain personality type? I didn't. It includes the following traits: high intelligence, personal charm and magnetism, easily bored, unable to form deep and )especially) lasting relationships, secretive, manipulative, ruthless. Most of all, no conscience. Eddie had some of that, no not all - no evidence he was manipulative or ruthless. But he had a lot of it. I'd say he was a borderline psychopath with criminal tendencies. I was also told, once, by a teacher in high school, that if you start reading these psychological profiles, you'll find yourself reflected all over the place. PiCo (talk) 11:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Leo's love life
Et voila! I've made it shorter, conciser, crunchier. I've left that long quote by the lady art critic in, but what on earth is she talking about? - read it carefully and see if there's not some glitches in it, as some bits just don't make sense. We could also afford to lose a pic or two. And at the end I've mentioned something about Melzi and Leo's notebooks - this is important, as Melzi's only claim to fame is that he was the custodian of the books - but what exactly did he do with them? I sort of recall that he did nothing at all - just shuffled the pages and never got round to publishing them. It's worth a mention. As also is the fact that Leo had Salai as John the Baptist in the house when he died - that and the Mona were, I think, the only two paintings of his own that he retained, and they both obviously meant a lot to him. PiCo (talk) 07:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

John the Baptist in art
Is there an article on JB in art? I don't think there is, but it would make a great subject - trace it from the Byzantines up to the modern day (although I have a feeling that JB lost popularity after the Baroque). Maybe Johnbod might be interested in taking this up as a project too? PiCo (talk) 08:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added some text to John the Baptist & will do pics later, and who knows, maybe some references. Johnbod (talk) 15:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No email received. I've now enabled the email link on my personal page, try that one. PiCo (talk) 07:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Someone very kindly came and cleaned up the underlining - I still have no idea what caused it. As for the emails, go to my Talk page, go to the left side under the Wiki logo (the jigsaw-globe, go down to the third box (headed Toolbox), and somewhere down there you'll see a link, "E-mail this user". You've got one yourself - have a look to the left.PiCo (talk) 06:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Just had a great idea for a new NGO here - we get the local lawyers on borad, round up some bar-girls who have kids by foreigner sex-pats who've buggered off home to Sydney or London or wherever, and contact some Oz or UK or other lawyers. Then we get the letters flowing: Dear Mr Deadbeat, we write on behalf of our client, who would really be most grateful if you could fork out a bit of cash on a monthly basis in the way of child support, and if you deny paternity, we for our part will do all the DNA tests you want, and by the way does your wife know? Should be fun! PiCo (talk) 09:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * This began one night in a bar, over a beer with a buddy. We were talking about a Cambodian lady who had just been talking with us - she has a really sweet little boy by a European father, who pays her $200 a month, although grudgingly. My friend Chris said he knew half a dozen bar-girls who'd be glad to get a similar deal. It was intended as a bit of a joke, but I floated it with a friend who runs an NGO here (involved in HIV work) and she thinks it's quite a good idea. So I might take it a little further. PiCo (talk) 11:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Rose window
Dziękuję za zainteresowanie moją pracą. Przepraszam, że przysporzyłem Tobie kłopotów, ale nie jestem specjalistą architektem więc stąd wynikło nieporozumienie. Miło mi, że moja fotografia mimo wszystko okazała się przydatna. Chociaż nie miałem takiego zamiaru, to dla Ciebie w najbliższym czasie prześlę kilka innych zdjęć. Ocenę i możliwość ich wykorzystania pozostawiam Tobie. Pozdrawiam serdecznie. Albertus teolog (talk) 13:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Zgodnie z obietnicą przedstawiam moje witraże:

Pozdrawiam. Albertus teolog (talk) 12:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Bardzo dziękuję. Czuję się wyróżniony. Co do tłumaczenia - to bardzo polecam Tłumacza :-). Albertus teolog (talk) 21:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To ma sens :-) Bardzo dziękuję za Twoją wiadomość. Jest czytelna i zrozumiała. Mam nadzieję, że Ty również rozumiesz co do Ciebie piszę.
 * Trochę patrzyłem na Twoją pracę. Dzięki niej poznałem wiele nowych informacji. Twoje artykuły są bardzo rozbudowane i bogate w treść. W porównaniu z innymi projektami różnią się szczegółowymi informacjami. Widać, że jesteś fachowcem. Gratuluję wiedzy.
 * Jeżeli chodzi o mój angielski, to jego znajomość jest słaba, dlatego wolę jak robi to Tłumacz. Wiem tylko jak przeczytać na mydle for you :-) Urodziłem się i mieszkam w Polsce. Do szkoły chodziłem gdy w moim kraju rządzili komuniści, dlatego zmuszony byłem uczyć się języka rosyjskiego. Angielski nie był szanowany.
 * W Paryżu byłem w czasie wakacji. Niektóre rzeczy zchwuciły mnie i cieszę się, że mój zachwyt na coś się przydał. Średniowieczna sztuka należy do tych rzeczy, które mnie zachwycają chyba najbardziej.
 * Mieszkam w Bydgoszczy. W pobliżu mojego miasta rodziło się państwo Polskie. W moich okolicach pozostało też wiele zabytków Zakonu Krzyżackiego. W średniowieczu mieli oni tu swoje zamki i prowadzili tu wojny z Polską.
 * Jestem teologiem katolickim i tym się zajmuję przede wszystkim na Wikipedii.
 * Życzę wszystkiego co dobre i polecam się w razie konieczności. Albertus teolog (talk) 08:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Translation: It makes sense :-) Thank you very much for your message. It is readable and understandable. I hope you also understand what you write. Some looked at your work. Through her I met a lot of new information. Your articles are very powerful and rich in content. In comparison with other projects differ in details. You can see that you are a professional. I congratulate knowledge. As far as my English, to his knowledge is weak, so how does a willingness to Translate. I know only how to read on the soap for you :-) I was born and live in Poland. The school chodziłem when the Communists ruled my country, so I was forced to learn the Russian language. English was not respected. In Paris I was in during holidays. Some things zchwuciły me and am happy that my wonder at something przydał. Medieval art belongs to those things which I still probably the most. I live in Bydgoszcz. In the nearby town of my rodziło the Polish state. In my surroundings, and many relics left the Teutonic. In the Middle Ages, they had their castles here and ran a war with Poland. Teologiem'm Catholic and I do this primarily on Wikipedia. I hope everything is good and I would recommend, if necessary. Albertus theologian (talk) 08:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amandajm"

Cellini
(Message posted to Leonard G. 01:11, 3 September 2008)
 * Hi Leonard! About adding images. If you jam an image under an existent image, and link it to the text, then the images above it (in this case two images above it), cannot project down beside the text, so they force a break in the text down to the place where the image is "fixed". If you are viewing the page on a narrow squarish screen, then the gap might be only a centimetre or so, and hardly noticeable, but on a wide screen there might be a gap in the text of 10 centimetres or more. This problem occurs also when text boxes are placed in the intro, or when someone inserts a pic below an existent text box. For this reason, it's important to preview your edit, and to look, not just at whether the pic is there, but also at what effect it has had on its surroundings. Remember that if your screen is squarish, then any layout problem will be greater on a wider screen.


 * I'm about to fix the problem, but if you go to the history of the article and review your edit, you'll see what I'm referring to! Cheers! Amandajm (talk) 09:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * (Response from Leonard G.)
 * I attempted to reproduce the problems using the equivalent of my last edit. Using Firefox 3.0.1 and Safari 3.1,2 on a 20 inch aluminum iMac I could not reproduce any problem. I resized the window from tall and narrow to wide. The right column of images moved without causing breaks in the text layout. I am not sure what you mean by "...link it to the text" - the only way I know how to do this is to include a

to prevent subsequent text flow from a following section (not needed in latest revisions for centered images, apparently). Perhaps this is a browser specific problem? Are you using a Microsoft browser? Under Windows or Vista? (I do not have these available for testing). The layout is much improved by your changes, especially needed since the preceding image is narrow relative to that of the bust (in my opinion default thumbs are far too small for art and architecture articles, forcing an otherwise uneeded access to the image). Thanks for your attention to this and for notifying me. Best wishes, Leonard G. (talk) 19:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * See my page for response - Leonard G. (talk) 03:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Flaw shows up in Internet Explorer on Library PC. Version number and OS not available due to kiosk-like user interface (Probably pre- vista). Likely due to standards unconformity as this is the cause of most problems with IE. - 64.166.145.2 (talk) 21:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC) (Leonard G.)

St. Peters
I'll upload the original sometime tonight so you can tinker with it all you want. I'll makes sure to spell it right this time :) FSU Guy (talk) 11:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Here is the original file, do what you need to do for the article
 * [[Image:Vatican altar 1.jpg|500px]]
 * Here is another I made that shows a little more
 * [[Image:Vatican Altar 2.jpg|500px]]
 * FSU Guy (talk) 02:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
I wanted to stop in and thank you for improving the Louvre article. I've been trying to garner more "momentum" on the article (I mean c'mon: it's the most visited art museum in the world; over 800+ years of architectural history; presents an overview of French arch; contains arguably the most important collection western painting, etc, etc, etc). It's good to see new faces around the place; I've been looking at it for so long I can't objectively judge the contents. Lazulilasher (talk) 14:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes: I meant new to the Louvre article. It's good to have more participating in the discussions, editing the article, etc. Lazulilasher (talk) 15:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Benedict's apology
There is an entire article on the topic -. Explain to me why the topic needs discussion in an article about a Cathedral. Wrong article, wrong place. -- Mattinbgn\talk 09:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not every article about the RC church has to refer to the sex abuse scandals. I am tired of having to monitor articles about the church to remove ever more tenuous links to the scandals added by WP:SPAs. The apology is certainly relevant in the Catholic sex abuse cases, it is likely relevant in the article on World Youth Day 2008, it is possibly relevant in the article about Pope Benedict XVI but it is of marginal relevance (or not relevant) in the St Mary's article. Do we continue and add the apology to the George Pell article because he was there too; do we add it to the Sydney artcle because it was made in that city? The line has to be drawn somewhere and to my mind, that line excludes St Mary's. If it absolutely must be added (and I remain unconvinced), then it surely does not belong in the lead per WP:UNDUE. -- 06:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I still fail to see how an article about a building can possibly relate to clergy sex abuse and how the venue for an apology is any way relevant. Nonetheless, as you would have noticed I have not removed the inappropriate content since you re-added and have no plans to do so in the future. Seeing it is unlikely that we are likely to reach agreement I feel further discussion is fruitless. Regards, Mattinbgn\talk 09:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Carlisle Cathedral
As requested, but you need someone with a better camera and a proper flash! --Northernhenge (talk) 13:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Leo's love of carrots
Ah, have I been biting the newbies again? Yes. I know he was a carrot-cruncher, and his reasons for so doing redound to his credit, but, I ask, if he hadn't painted the Mona Lisa, would anyone care? The trouble with Leo (amd I'm assumingn here that he 's the one you mean by "an interesting character", rather than our new Vegan editor), is that he was so very quirky indeed. Here's a Italy's leading artist, selling himself to L. Sforza as...what? A designer of defensive earthworks, is what! Why did he do that? The money? Probably. What are you doing in the Old Dart, anyway? PiCo (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


 * What, you've got photos of Leonardo munching on a vegetarian pizza? My current project, since you ask, is finding a publisher for the book on Eddie Gibson. White Lotus in Bangkok are interested. I'm also dabbling in a detective story set in Phnom Penh, but it goes slowly. I lack discipline, is my problem. If I asked, would you come round every morning and whip me? By the way, you can get CDs here (classical and jazz) for $1.50-$3. Not much choice, but cheap!PiCo (talk) 06:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The detective story progresses. Well, I finished the first chapter. My hero runs a girlie-bar, plays Bach partitas in his spare time (shades of Sherlock), and quotes Kant to corrupt Cambodian police captains (the Categorical Imperative and its relationship to bribe-taking). Anything for a change, and detective stories are not expected to be realistic. Should I make him a vegetarian? PiCo (talk) 15:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Tang Dynasty
Ok. Your screen must be much wider than mine; and yes, I grasp the concept. I didn't think placing the infobox in the lead would cause such a pain. I am merely following the standard which seems to have been set forth for all other Chinese dynasty articles.

As for the "ghastly" and "dreadful" arrangement of pictures and boxes in the article, are those words really necessary or appropriate to describe a Wikipedia article? I wouldn't dream of considering the notoriously plebeian Wikipedia a source of criticism for an artist such as yourself. In fact, if you hadn't mentioned your background as an artist working in layout and design, I would have mistaken you for a new-wave feng shui adherent castigating me for not abiding by the rules of cosmological placement (after all, this is a Chinese history article).

If moving the initial picture to the left has solved the problem, then all is well. Have a good one, and try not to take Wikipedia too seriously, even if it is a Featured Article of mine that we are talking about.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 01:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Why thank you; I hope my lack of picture-and-box arranging skills is compensated by the textual substance of the article. And no, you're not rude, you just have a unique and flowery way of expressing your justifiable Wiki rage. I'd also have to agree with Confucius, that's a fine quote! Cheers.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 01:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC)



Western painting
Have a look. It needs improvin.Research Method (talk) 06:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Belton House
I came back today to finish the ones I missed but see that you have already replaced them all. Thanks and nice job! Theresa Knott | token threats 13:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amanda from ExplorerMMVIII
Hi Amanda,

I really appreciate your friendliness, helpfulness and many contributions to wikipedia! Unfortunately, I don't think I will be able to actively contribute, or follow the Leonardo article, or other articles, very closely. I did the little I did because I felt that Leonardo's vegetarianism should be added. I was also very bothered that Borgia and Machiavelli were described as friends without evidence! With high regards, ExplorerMMVIII (talk) 15:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)ExplorerMMVIII

Re Ross
Hi Amandajm, thanks for explaining your revert of my wikifying edit in this article. My reply is on my talk page. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Western Painting
Do you think this article is Neutral?Research Method (talk) 23:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

GIF > PNG
No problem - I was just trying to ensure that we didn't have Featured Articles with image glitches in them due to the problems at Commons. Converting to PNG seemed the easiest way to make sure of this. Black Kite 10:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Caspar David Friedrich
Hi Amanda; I thinking of taking the above to FAC in the next few days, would appreciate if you might give it a run through. If its not your area; no worries. Thanks. Ceoil sláinte 11:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey. The legacy section could be an article of its own! I'm very tempted to add Magritte's "The Human Condition"; actually I probably will. Checking out your other suggestions now. Thanks.... Ceoil sláinte 11:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Give me a few minutes. Both are going in! Ceoil  sláinte 12:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I only found this a few days ago, and it is perhaps one of the most emotive paintings I ever come accross. Ceoil  sláinte 12:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Feel free to do as you wish. I would appreciate if you could add a caption to the The Sea of Ice, explaining why its so significant and great, etc. And by the way, I well remember the Leonardo da Vinci FAC. I bit my lip at the time and have regretted it since. Ceoil  sláinte 12:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I promise you, if you write what you see and feel, I can source it. I am knee deep in books and pdf's; its all possible. Ceoil  sláinte 12:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 'Night. Ceoil  sláinte 12:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw that; nice find. Ceoil (talk) 00:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Blacket
Thanks for the clarification about Blacket, but if it's a quote, shouldn't it be in quotation marks?

After taking a second look, yes definitely it should be in quote marks if it's a quote. If there is a reason for using that spelling, it should be explained in the text. If there's no good reason for using it, it shouldn't be used. The text doesn't show why that spelling has been used.

Sardaka (talk) 09:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

da Vinci
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Papa November (talk) 11:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Papa, Please don't template regular, established editors. If you have something to say, use words, not html. Ceoil (talk) 11:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Amanda, sorry about the template message - I guess it was a little impersonal. However, I really was quite upset by the personal attacks in your recent post. I know we disagree about Wikipedia policy, but there's no need to describe me as "naive", "ignorant", to state that I "obviously don't know much", to accuse me of being an internet troll without providing any evidence and to finally tell me to "piss off" (albeit with some qualification).

The policy on no personal attacks is quite clear on making groundless accusations about people's behaviour outside Wikipedia, and it can lead to you being blocked from editing if you continue to act in such a manner. I've always been civil towards you and I hope that we can put this behind us. Let's stick to discussing the issues from now on. Papa November (talk) 12:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amanda, I've just seen the changes you made to the lead section. They are exactly what I was looking for, and it looks great! The hyperbole are now attributed to reliable sources and the extra quote you found summarises things really nicely. Just a quick query though. The times and guardian references are very reliable sources for the word "iconic". Are the other websites equally reliable? If not, they aren't really necessary and should probably be removed. Two well-known newspapers are quite sufficient! I'm glad we're sorting this out, finally! Also, where does the word "perhaps" come from in "...and perhaps the most diversely talented person...". It sounds a bit vague. Is it a direct quote? Papa November (talk) 15:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Géricault
Hi Amanda, I was wondering if you help me identify. I found it in a documentary on Géricault, and want to use it for The Raft of the Medusa. But - I dont know who/what it is. The voice-over in the doc mentions the Sistine Chapel close to where its shown, but Johnbod doubts that its a Michelangelo. The image is very blurred (the doc is from the 1950's, so I not holding up much hope of finding it tbh.) Anyway. Ceoil (talk) 18:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm just embarrassed now for being so wrong! Thabks for clarifying that, img has been 'speedied'. Ceoil (talk) 20:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks for letting me off the hook . I know what you mean by the implications of the ship's name, but MO is that since the Titanic, there is a certain amout of fatalism involved in boarding a vessel called "Victory" or "Invincible". It might as well be called "Give it your best shot God; just try me!". I'd prefer "The Grand", "The Adequate", or "The This Ship passes the saftey standards of regulation F1-0h2o", to be honest. No need to go pushing you luck with God. Ceoil (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Great story about the Mummy. Your turn of phrase is very nice; I love the idea of a member of the dead "annoying ... curators". Those pesky gouls, pah! Ceoil (talk) 00:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Grammar
You are not being pedantic.

Some people in England (particularly the south) have developed the habit of expanding "couldn't've" into "couldn't of", when clearly it is "couldn't have". to change it is clearly a correction. I believe different to is habit which is contrary to the grammatical context, and should never be used in any authoratitive work (unless it is a quotation). Similarly I believe that changing St. James' to St. James's is a correction.

However, if you wish I will not refer to such edits as corrections. --JohnArmagh (talk) 15:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

You are by no means an 'ignoramus'. I do not infer that those who say "couldn't of" are ignoramuses - I believe they think they are speaking correctly. As I believe that those who misuse the apostrophe believe they are using it correctly.

Although [colloquial] language usage does vary from place-to-place, documents - especially those which purport authority - should maintain a uniform standard. Prior to the introduction of a standard British English there was considerable variation in spelling even within a single document. It is important to maintain a standard, as failure to do so can lead to ambiguity - which ultimately undermines authority.

Back to the use of the apostrophe - agreed that the use varies - but there is no reason it should - indeed standard British English usage avoids ambiguity.

There are instances where it is valid to 'misuse' the apostrophe - where for instance an institution/location has an official name incorportating the misuse - for instance St. Thomas' Hospital in London. On inspection of some of the signage on that location it can be seen that they recognise the 'error' as the signs read St. Thomas' s .

Clearly the use of Jesus' is so ubiquitous now that any protest against it is doomed to failure. I suspect Americanization has been allowed to creep inexorably into British English and has been allowed to keep hold because so many believe it is correct - and popular acceptance ultimately is the arbiter of what actually does become the correct form. JohnArmagh (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Blackett
It is true that the spelling "Blackett" is explained further down, but this does nothing to clarify the situation at the start, where the reason for the spelling is not apparent, and to anyone who reads it, it is completely unclear and just looks like an error. It needs explaining immediately, which would probably be appropriate in the intro. Also, the statement about how his descendants see him really needs a ref, otherwise it just looks like the kind of sweeping statement that doesn't really belong in an encyclopedia.

Sardaka (talk) 10:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Cathedral
There is a lot of detail in the article - and as you point out the details lack source references - it will be quite a job - but I reckon it is a job worth doing. --JohnArmagh (talk) 10:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Poster Slacky Flat small.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Poster Slacky Flat small.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 15:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Poster Gracie Anne small.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Poster Gracie Anne small.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 15:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Palma
Ciao Amanda! How are you? Can I ask you opinion about a matter I'm having with user:Johnbod? He moved Palma il Giovane to Palma Giovane, which, according to me, is incorrect as it's an Italian name (it's the equivalent of something like Lucas Cranach the Elder). Ciao and thanks. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ciao Amanda! Thanks for the delicious message... fortunately I had already peacefully allowed Johnbod to use Palma Giovane, although it still sounds ridiculous at my ears. It seems we were the one having Raphael and Correggio, so that's why we have a more aesthetic sense than you English! Joking... What are you working on lately? Me, I'm taken by my engineering stuff so I've not much time to work on Wikipedia, sadly. For example, my Valle dei Templi is still agonizing. I'll do my best in the future. Ciao and good work! --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 08:55, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

fyi
FYI -Adam (talk) 07:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Yr email
Amanda, can you send me yr email again? The one I have don't work. Love, P.

Sheffield Cathedral article quality
Hi, thanks for rating the Sheffield Cathedral article. However, could you take another look at your quality ratings... you rated for two projects at the same time yet you assessed it as 'Start' for one project and 'C' for another. As both projects use the same quality rating criteria I am assuming that this was a typo, but I just wanted to check. Thanks, —Jeremy (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. I had assumed that different projects using the same quality rating criteria would come up with the same ratings. I hadn't thought about how the amount of the content of an article that is relevant to an individual project might affect its quality rating, but I guess that you're right. —Jeremy (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Sistene Chapel restoration - quotation
Hi. When I came along the article, (namely this version) I saw an incorrectly formatted quotation template that hid the entire quoted text and put a small blue box around the reference tag. Take a look. I fixed the formatting, even though it seemed odd to me that the text should be formatted as quotation. I figured that as a featured article, there was a reason for it, so I just tried to touch it up. I hope that clears everything up. - Oreo Priest  talk 21:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you really see the whole text in the version I linked above? Are you sure there wasn't a small blue box where the quotation should have been? Can you double check? The reason I think this is so puzzling is that I would think that the format of the quotation tells Wikipedia what the page should look like, which then tells the browser. In other words, I think the change would be the same for all browsers. Cheers,  Oreo Priest  talk 02:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok, I don't know what they were talking about. Happy editing! - Oreo Priest  talk 14:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you know lesena?
CIao! Can I ask you if exists an English term to define what we call lesena? I see English is in practice the only main language not having an article about it. By the way, my recent additions could interest you: Giovanni Antonio Amadeo, Lugano Cathedral, Santa Maria del Carmine, Pavia and Santa Maria di Canepanova. Ciao and good work as usual!!! --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 22:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Aloha!! Thank you much for the corrections! It's fun that in Italian "compartment" is mostly used for train's passengers compartments. eh eh...
 * Ciao Amanda! My last additions, needing cleanup as usual... (shame shame!!) Pieve di Sant'Andrea (Pistoia), San Bartolomeo in Pantano, St Andrew Pulpit, San Pier Maggiore, Pistoia, Pistoia Cathedral. I've called in also our friend user:Johnbod, anyway. Ciao and good work. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 10:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ciao! Thanks sooooo much for your quick help! No, my source (Italian wikipedia), says exactly "Scag", put into a link (a red link, unfortunately, this is why I didn't add a link at least also here); thus I think it'd be correct. My next effort would be San Giovanni Fuorcivitas... I got tired of microcerebred who add insulse details about a useless mall of some totally boring county in the Cotton Belt, while true treasures in Italy (when I can, sometimes I try also to translate stuff from Spain or France) are overlooked! GGRR! Joking... thanks again from Attilio. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Capitalization of Tradition in St. Peter's article
The usage of the word tradition is such that when referring to a set of customs or practices, it is not capitalized. When it is referring to the second half of the deposit of faith, as in Sacred or Holy Tradition, it is capitalized. --Xparasite9 (talk) 21:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy holidays
Hi Amanda. Before I call it a day, I want to wish you good tidings and boisterous celebration! JNW (talk) 06:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Stained glass
Hi, Amanda, sorry to drag you from your skinny-dipping reveries, but I was surprised to see we didn't have Category:Stained glass, so now we do. I've added a handful of articles, but no doubt you know more. I also set up Category:Christmas art and more formally named sub-cats - I bet I haven't caught all of those either. All best wishes for Christmas & the New Year! Johnbod (talk) 20:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

scope of paired articles
I noticed you had contributed and invite you to weigh in on the subject. Nativity of Jesus in art and Nativity of Jesus in later culture have a potentially unclear area between them: where is visual art of the 20th century to go? I have started a discussion here and would welcome your comments there. BrainyBabe (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)