User talk:Bishonen/Archive 5

Let me be the first
Let me be the first to say welcome back dearest Bishonen. Sadly though it is hello and goodbye. I am off to a place which has not yet attained the standards of civilization to which I am accustomed. I may be on the internet tomorrow, I may not. I may stay away longer and attempt tp discover on behalf of my great nation the lost civilization of Vidalia. The again I may stay in NY. Then again I may go on to Canada where I see a need for some charitable work. Speak whenever. Welcome home. Giano | talk 16:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, since Giano has beaten me to it, I want to be the second. I'm not sure whether Wikipedia is feeling better or whether spring has come, but whichever it is, it's good to see you back. I owe you an e-mail, anyway, but I owe lots of e-mails to people, so you may have to wait a little bit. All is well with me. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 16:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Now that I come to think of it, maybe it wasn't Wikipedia that was to feel better. I assumed that because of the "it", but you referred to the page as taking a wikibreak rather than to yourself. Are your pronouns a little sloppy, or am I being dense? :-) If you were referring to yourself, I hope you're feeling better. AnnH ♫ 16:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * And I'm happy to be the third to say welcome back to your page. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 16:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Wait, where wans't I? El_C 16:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * A day late and a dollar short as usual. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, this is going to become much worse before it becomes... much worse! Kitty 17:13, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Salon's open
You guys are here already? That's so sweet! I was going to say, the salon is now open for business, please join me in a cup of tea or coffee! Make yourself at home, have a glass of champagne! Ignore the rain of frogs, bring your brollies! Bishonen | ノート 17:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC).


 * Hmmph! At least some of us had the courtesy to wait until the official opening. Heathens, all of them up there! &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Very right. --BorgQueen 17:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Have a good weekend, all. POETS.  I'm off for a pint in 15 mins. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Have a cozy cuppa! ..dave souza, talk 19:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Alack! Did we ever come up with a name for the Salon or will it just be generically called "The Salon?" *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 19:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Being from the South, i'll have a nice tall glass of sweetened iced tea, if you please. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 19:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Two questions:
 * What's a "brollies"?
 * Got any tequila?

android 79  19:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * 1. One brolly, two brollies: umbrellas. Good against rains of frog, rodents, snakes.
 * 2. Do I ever! Help yourself! Bishonen | ノート 21:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC).

How lovely!
Darling! I am so sorry I missed your call, and so pleased you left your card. How delightful the salon is open again. Indeed, we've all been quite bereft while you were gone. All the usual gathering spots had the same dreadful people and the same trite conversation as last season. The theatre has been dull - except one perfectly horrid opera which has the most pathetic excuse for a soprano, screeching away but everyone's ignoring her - really, simply too dull. Oh, I did have a secret admirer for bit - he was quite devoted, but then he spoke with some of my other beaus and became discouraged, I believe. But now you're back, and you simply must tell me about your excursion! Did you in the end decide on Arctic rather than North Pole? I am all attention. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I give up; who are you? Lydia Bennet? Both the précieuses ridicules? Millamant? Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's poodle? Bishonen | ノート 14:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Very close, but I am currently channeling Dorothy Parker's From the Diary of a New York Lady, circa 1928. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Although the poodle is clever... Wish I'd thought of that. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Who do you think you are?
Who do you think you are banning Fighter for freedom? I hope you can tell I'm being sarcastic. That guy is obviously on some kind of drugs. Well you got one pshycopath out of Wikipedia. Good Job! Ifeelfine 21:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Vsmith's block of Theodore7
Vsmith's block of Theodore7 was actually February 10, a month ago... &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops. What a sneaky guy! Bishonen | ノート 23:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Sorry for spamming that; I was hoping to catch your attention before you updated every single page this incident is now spread across. No such luck :-( &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

More Theodore7
I have undone your 2-week block and replaced it with an indefinite one (and the protection of his UT page) because he continued to make the same legal threats on his UT page. I encourage you to review this action and give me feedback on it and, if necessary, reverse me. —BorgHunter ubx (talk) 01:12, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do the psychos always make the legal threats?Ifeelfine 22:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That'll do, now. Bishonen | ノート 22:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC).

flora
there aren't enough in my hopper, else I'd leave one; so instead, just Hello! +sj + 01:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * How nice to see you, sj, sit down, have a ! (While the graciouos hostess goes to bed, here, but there should be plenty of company.) Bishonen | ノート 01:19, 12 March 2006 (UTC).
 * My eyes, the LSDoes nothing! Who said that?! El_C 03:59, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Tour
A tour of America in 18th c. British literature has been e-mailed to you. It lacks a conclusion, but I did ok for writing it all in a day. Geogre 23:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Drive for Swedish quality articles
Hello. This is in regards to the upcoming Wikipedia improvements Pushing to 1.0 and Stable versions, which have the intentions to provide stable versions of articles suitable for prints or publishing.

I've noticed you have written several articles about Swedish matters. If you feel some of these are decent enough to deserve recognition, you are encouraged to nominate them at Swedish Wikipedians' notice board/Swedish quality articles. In the end, our articles should be comparable to what is expected from the Encyclopedia Britannica. If it currently isn't, but you feel you have spent a considerable amount of time on it, you are still encouraged to nominate it, so that your work will be recognized and others can continue to improve on it. Don't be shy! :-)

Fred-Chess 11:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

They're breeding
The comma examiners and gnat inspectors. See my talk page for an example. (Someone had done the immensely constructive job of removing all apostrophes in dates in Oroonoko, and I reversed it.) I could say more vitriolic things than I have said already, in fact, but this goes into the overfull file of "rancor that profits no one to let out." Urgh. Geogre 01:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC) (Looking for a bell tower to climb.)

Lonely ost of the subarctic north
Somebody just created Category:Swedish cheeses. Don't they know how hard researching Swedish cheese is? As far as I can tell, no anglophone has ever taken an interest in the subject. Why is that? It there something they're not telling us about these cheeses? Are they secretly just awful? (I have to admit, the only cheese I've ever been unable to eat was my first and last try of geitost (yes I know it's not Swedish, but if Giano can say I'm from Idaho, maybe I can be allowed this stretch), but perhaps I got a bad batch.) &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you couldn't eat it, you got the right stuff. Bishonen | ノート 07:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC).

don't ask you?
But I want to know! Short tons or metric tons? Tons or tonnes? Displacement tons? Deadweight tons? Harbour tons? Assay tons? Freight tons, gross registered tons, water tons, How many tons? *bounce bounce yap yap* KillerChihuahua?!? 19:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoa! Down, nice doggie! Have a piece of Hushållsost (the little circle over the a makes it delicious, you know.) &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Harbour tons? All right, so be it. Do you realize how disapponted I was not to see any pecks, firkins, or hogsheads in there? You just stuck with the liters! :-( As for hushållsost, the word has a particular meaning: cheap cheese. That's what it means. "Hushåll" is marketese for "cheapskate". While as for the redoubtable goat cheese geitost, only one man in our generation has eaten it and lived. Bishonen | ノート 19:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Does it literally mean "household", or was that source full of bad cheese? It's not fair about geitost; it looks so pretty, and had a beautiful label. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No, it's household, sure. Only cheapskates hold houses. Hey, Bunchofcheese, did you notice the final paragraph of Jules Verne On Ice? Making Nils the hero as suggested. :-) Bishonen | ノート 23:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC).
 * I sure did! Nils is da man. I keep looking for opportunities to work the phrase "Paradise! Large even ice floes with pools of sweet drinking water and here and there a tender young polar bear!" into my life now. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Heh. Before I read up on it I knew the story vaguely, as a Swede will, especially since the 1982 movie, and I assumed that they only ate polar bear meat because they had to; but no, it turns out they liked it, they never tired of it. Andrée writes happily in the diary about the succulent rib meat, and has whole menus centered on it: frostbitten chocolate, sugar that's gotten wet so many times it's in liquid form and kept in a bottle, polar bear ribs. There's so much material in those diaries, I could do a Featured Article about the food alone. (With a great surprise ending about the respective merits of the trichinosis theory, the vitamin A poisoning theory, the botulism theory.) They had canned cheese, too.

User:TheEmoEater
I could use a hand here. I removed offensive content from his userpage, but was reverted by User:Flamingspinach, and now he's TheEmoEater has gone into full-on troll mode. android 79  19:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * iMuchas gracias, muchacha! (All these special characters in the little box, and they don't even have an upside-down exclamation point?! Or an interrobang?) android  79  20:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I hope you're not talking about me with "full-on troll mode" :< Sorry, it appears I had a vast misconception as to the extent of the sanctity of one's own userpage o.o Hope I haven't caused too much trouble! &mdash; flamingspinach | (talk) 03:45, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops! No, no, I was most definitely talking about TheEmoEater, who is certainly living up to the troll label. android  79  03:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That I'll agree with :) &mdash; flamingspinach | (talk) 04:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Here is an interrobang: "‽|‽" and some Spanish punctuation marks: "¿" "¡" -- ALoan (Talk) 11:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow you're strict
--TheEmoEater 21:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I tell it straight because you've been messing about too much already. It's a personal attack to go on about Android's so-called "vandalism" for cleaning up your attack page. Please don't keep that up, or you're likely to find yourself blocked for trolling and disruption. Bishonen | ノート 21:25, 14 March 2006 (UTC).

Andrée
Bish, I'll take a look at your references in a few days, but I'm a bit busy right now. u p p l a n d 10:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Tups, I just stalked you to Christina of Sweden. My, my, there's a precocious 23-year-old! Grrrrr. There ought to be a law. Or a note below the edit window, along with the copyvio and verifiability caution: "Don't say things at random just because they occur to you". That would cover a lot that goes on in this place. Bishonen | ノート 10:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC).


 * The article is terrible. I just looked it up yesterday when listening to a radio interview with Peter Englund on his new biography of Christina. I removed some hardly legible nonsense on how Swedish supposedly had the same word for a monarch regardless of sex, that had survived in the article since early november last year. Despite some probably excellent articles on legendary baseball players and a complete coverage of pokemonology, Wikipedia 1.0 still seems far away. u p p l a n d 10:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I haven't checked the references yet, but I expanded Ekholm's bio a little. There is more to say about his meteorological contributions, but I just don't understand enough meteorology to do that. u p p l a n d 18:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Emails
For some reason I can read emails but not reply to them, I'm on a strange connection so it probably is something to prevent me communicating with the outside world, bur does not prevent me posting here. Indcidentally this confirms my view that most of the editors here are probably convicts. I am tied up for most of the day anyway - so can you keep on eye on the palazzo for me, especially te rose tinted image which keeps disappearing on favour of one which looks more like a Florentine Penitentionary (prisons on the mind I wonder why). Giano | talk 14:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Managed to send one Giano | talk 19:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Block on 209.130.181.130
A quick "thank you" for the swift block on this vandal. I was having a hard time reverting his/her "contributions" they were coming at such a rate. A quick block was definitely needed. Thanks! Gwernol 18:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! Bishonen | ノート 18:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC).

I am surprised!
I'm sorry to see my interest enhancing bear has been thoughtlessly and callously (and if I may say so - to the page's detriment) removed from your new page however do not despair I have found some more. Giano | talk 17:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It's nice to see this page dotted here and there with a tender young polar bear. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Request for expert assisstance (Hopkins School)
Hi Bishonen! I've been sent by Harro5 to request your help. I understand you were a huge help on Caulfield Grammar School, and I'm hoping to join your ranks with my own school, Hopkins School. The article has already been through its first PR, an ill-advised FAC, and is closing out its second PR. After that and a few final dabs (I'm trying to get a good digital map of the campus, eg) I'd like to try my hands at the second FAC. Is there any chance you could give it a good once over, change what you can, and LMK if anything major needs alteration that you know of? Thanks! Staxringold 00:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Expert on school articles, me? Ha ha! But I'll be glad to take a look, I'll probably get to it later today. Bishonen | ノート 08:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Thanks for all the advice! I'll get right on it, let me know if you think of or see something else! Staxringold 04:23, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've reformatted the references, listing all the web sources as retrieved today (having checked they still provide the proper information). I'll move the Hilltoppers section, and try to work out the boring bits of the Academics/Facilities section, but they are rather needed (if dull) in a school article. I think chronological order is the only way that will be clear to the procession of time in The Fallow Years, but the last sentence is a bit nonsensical. The reason is that the better source, Chronicles of Hopkins Grammar School, is a pretty rare book at the librarian wouldn't let me take it home. Thus, I was forced to finish off the section with the more outline style manuscripts I have from the school archivist. Once I get back to Hopkins and get my hands on that book I can touch up the ending with more ref'd detail. Staxringold 04:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Pattern of contention
Hi Bishonen -- Have limited time here right now, but wanted to ask you about any history/information you might have on Sean Brunnock. On the Pottery article, (see discussion page and archive) for the past couple of months, he has been a source of contention with other users. Since I've been mostly away, I've only been "hit" a couple of times. While citing Wikipedia rules, he follows by applying them to his own opinions and arguments, but not allowing the same courtesy to others. He also does not appear to understand the idea of concensus, or the fact that any given topic can be seen from differing perspectives by people in other disciplines. He also discounts any personal or professional opinions by editors, except his own, of course. I am not interested in censuring him, but I also do not see any way of working with him in a constructive manner. Any information or advice would be welcome. WBardwin 02:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, W. I've never heard of this user. I've now read Talk:Pottery, and understand your frustration: he seems to shift his ground a lot, apparently in order to not engage with the major point of the other side. I think, or hope, that that point is that an encyclopedia article is supposed to report, not solve, the disagreements between published experts in the field. But the talkpage discussion having gotten entrenched in certain details that I don't know anything about, I'm not sure I'm reading it right. Anyway, yes, as an outsider's opinion, the user seems to either have trouble grasping that important principle, or to simply not want to; it's hard to tell whether it's time to stop assuming good faith or not. Theoretically, the thing to do for this content dispute is list the page (not the user—I'm sure that would be pretty pointless) on WP:RFC, for "more eyes". Although that theory often seems to come up against the sad fact that interest in these listings can be pretty low. I'd still advise you to try it, as it's not much trouble—RFC'ing a page is nothing like RFC'ing a user—but not to get your hopes up too much. Sorry I can't be of any help. Real Life just hit me with a lot of delayed essay grading, I shouldn't be on wiki at all right now, and I need to reserve the time I have strictly for my new article Jules Verne On Ice, which I spent my grading time writing (bad wikiaddict!). It's on Peer review right now (hint, hint, in case you feel like a little reviewing). How's your block collection coming? :P Bishonen | ノート 08:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC).

Article on the Wikipedia article on Prem Rawat
You may be interested to read this article by a critical former follower that discusses the Wikipedia article on Prem Rawat and also Wikipedia in general. Andries 09:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was, thanks. I believe he's quite right about the articles where people's passions are involved: no merely encyclopedia-writing editor is ever going to match the zealot in patience when it comes to molding an article to their preference, keeping guard over it, investing their lives into arguing about it. It's surprising that the system overall works as well as it does; but that's not very well. :-( Bishonen | ノート 10:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Now Jossi is arguing for its exclusion as an external link in the external link section. Yet another dispute in the endless disputes about this article See Talk:Prem_Rawat What do you say? Andries 06:57, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I say endless, endless, endless. :-( I've posted my opinion in this particular dispute on Talk:Prem_Rawat, but I really am not up for being drawn into any back-and-forth, you know. I have stuff to do in RL, and also I just get intolerably frustrated by the endlessness. Bishonen | ノート 10:45, 19 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Thanks for your comments at talk:Prem Rawat. To answer your questions that you posed to Jossi. Yes, there is a webpage created by Gerald Joe Moreno aka user:SSS108 that attacks me and my activities at Wikipedia. See www.saisathyasai.com/baba/Ex-Baba.com/sathya-sai-baba-wikipedia-bias.html Please do not link to it. I had originally and for a short time argued for excluding the website with the webpage from the external link section of the article Sathya Sai Baba, but I later came to the conclusion that I was wrong in this respect. Andries 12:57, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

It is peculiar to me, Bishonen, that you refer to "zealot patience" in regard to the Prem Rawat article, but fail to make the same assessment about Sathya Sai Baba, Andrie's life project here in Wikipedia. From my perspective, I am interested in having a solid, stable and NPOV article in Wikipedia about Prem Rawat, the same I wish for about any other subject. I oppose any attempts to make any article a vehicle for the disparagement and criticism of a person, in particular when this criticism is made by rather insignificant small group of people that have made it their stated aim to destroy someone's reputation by means of using the Internet and projects like WP to amplify their usually tiny voices. If you want to help with the article, you are most welcome as I have made it very obvious in my communications with you. But injecting yourself in the controversy by praising an editor for "his relentless efforts in attempting to balance the article", without knowing much about the subject, the dynamics involved, etc. and then saying "I don't have the time", it is difficult to understand. Maybe you care to explain. As for your tiredness of "back and forth", believe me when I say that I am of the same feeling. I am working on Core Topics for Wikipedia 1.0 and have to go back again and again to the Prem Rawat article to stop it from degenerating into a battleground yet again. Did you know Bishonen that we reached consensus about 2 years ago about the contents of the Prem Rawat article that Andries, the ex-premies and supporters all agreed to protect (with the understanding that no one what 100% happy with the article, but that we could live with it?). Do you know who challenged the consensus, Bishonen? Andries and his buddies the ex-premies (yes they are friends), They will not rest until their POV is asserted, and that is not a happening thing. NPOV a problem form them? collaborative editing too tedious? so they resort to writing "essays" and then link them to the article. Nice. So, if you are as tired as I am of all this back and forth, please don't encourage it further. Thanks.≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It is true that I made some changes, but no major changes after I founds new sources and after concensus had been reached. This is unavoidable if you ask me. And then suddenly editors starting behaving as if there never was a concensus version. You cannot blame people for not having the time and patience to edit that article and seek an alternative for that by writing articles and essays. And I do not think you need to know much about the subject to see that just mentioning the words "criticism and controversy" in the lead section without trying to be more specific is not very NPOV and quite unencyclopedic. Andries 16:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I explained the controversy in the lead as agreed, but it was reverted by someone else. Pls discuss in article talk, and not here. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you do not want me to discuss article content here then I will discuss your behavior. You deleted several times an explanation in the lead of what the "controversy and criticism" was all about. You reverted me several times and only stopped reverting me when an outsider, user:Dsmi, intervened. Andries 20:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you want to discuss behavior, first take a hard look at yours. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 21:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Ron Obvious will now split a train with his nose
Rather good stuff with the attempted blow to the pole. I did a few minor tweaks and tunings, but I think this is your Jonathan Wild: the story is going to make it one of the most popular FA's of them all. Be prepared to see it translated into several language (and perhaps be told that the German version is better). Geogre 17:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the help...i did mean to remove those two from FAC, but I was'nt sure about the proper procedure...once again, thanks.Thefourdotelipsis 21:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool. Bishonen | ノート 22:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC).

Being watched is being mocked
I just uploaded a new picture, and I sent you one that I won't upload, via e-mail. There is much mythology about the fellow pictured here, but the truth is that mockingbirds are mean, mean buggers. That's one more reason that Tom Robbins referred to them as the true artists of the natural world. Geogre 19:23, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Damn! I may be the only Wikipedian who hasn't been blocked or retired to be able to write about these things first hand.  Fever, spasmodic pain, etc.  Yipes.  Also, screaming Mimis (hmmmpf) last night.  Geogre 11:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh nooooo! Say it isn't so! How ARE you? Bishonen | ノート 11:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC).


 * I had to cancel my class (fortunately, only one today), and now I'm going to call the doc and hope that he doesn't want expensive tests. I'm starting to get a little loopy from the fever, and I feel deeply betrayed by pain coming from that spot.  Yow.  It's not nice, not nice at all.  Geogre 13:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear God! I had a very small one of those a few years back. Your experience must be different from mine, though, because when the pain hit me (somewhere in the small of the back) there was nothing to do but go straight to the emergency room in an ambulance. (Where I had the educational experience of learning that intravenous morphine has apparently no effect on me other than to induce vomiting.) Please get well, Geogre. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Mine may be smaller/better/whatever. In fact, I think I've dislodged it, but the pain is quite sharp (and I'm a veteran of pain).  Since I already take morphine every day, that may be why I'm tolerating it better.  My back hurts, but I'm also feeling really awful from the fever.  Maybe it ain't stones.  Maybe it's a kidney infection or a UTI.  Expensive tests will answer the question, but I'm in no position to go through them at this time.  Urinalysis nearly breaks the bank.  Machines that go "ping!" are out of the question.  Geogre 17:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Never fear Giano is here! Deep sympathy. I've had 3, the last one had to be surgically removed through keyhole surgery - believe me you don't want to know where the keyhole is! You must drink the juice of a whole lemon in a glass of hot water every morning for the rest of your life, and then you will never have another one.  Sadly that will not help you now so it's got to be pethidine and hope it's not the keyhole - actually it's not as bad as it sounds, just deeply embarrassing - but God it was worth it.  My surgeon said that the pain of a stone is far worse than child birth - my wife said "Hah! so how many children as he had" (well she said it in Italian, of course) which just goes to show that women are very possessive of pain.  Seriously Geogre have the surgery email me if you want the details they really are not too bad! Giano | talk 18:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, and drinking lots of water to flusg it through is a myth (my surgeon said) it just makes the pain worse as the fluid backs up, and doesn't flush it through any faster! Giano | talk 18:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I can picture Giano carrying his stone around with him like Pepys as he exhorts people to have his keyhole surgery. Ugh. This whole topic of conversation is making my back hurt. I'm sure Bishonen just loves it. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:47, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact BoG it had to go away to be analysed, and was never returned! You clearly have not sufferered as much as me - few have.  I'm sure Bishonen is quite happy to have her page turned into "medical questions and help page" - I find things medical fascinating - perhaps I should have been a Doctor, I would have been very proficient I'm sure.  I think I will go off now and write a new page "My Surgery" completely littered with inline cites! Giano | talk 18:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, the latest is that the fever keeps climbing, and my description of symptoms was wrong. We now think it's something else, and it, at least, would be due to chronic, pervasive dehydration, as I let the stuff sit too long and thereby plant seeds of misery in my virgin tissues.  (Well, I had an exam, once, but that was college, and I was experimenting.)  Damn, though, this fever is something else!  So, it's Cipro and water and staying unconscious for me for a while.  Geogre 20:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No Geogre stop right here! That is just too bad, you are going to have to cope alone - it's just the "snap" of those rubber gloves  - I am crying already. Giano | talk 21:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Ow ow ow ow ow. Is anybody well enough to give me a little support here? Why am I all alone in protesting objections like these? No, not you, Geogre, get back in bed! Bunch? Are you suffering from any masculine ailment, or are you at leisure? Bishonen | ノート 22:34, 20 March 2006 (UTC).


 * You say "jump" and I say "how high", 'zilla ;-) &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Exxccccellent [mr Burns voice]. I was a little busy. Bishonen | ノート 00:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Yes, mocking me, therefore, also being watched. A pity on Europeans. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 03:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, everyone posting in this section has to have had a kidney stone, prostate infection, or be female. Which is it? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ooooh! I know which one(s) I have!  And now even more fun.  However, the fever is a degree lower, so perhaps Cipro will really take care of everything in 2 days.  I'm willing to believe in the magic of bullets for the time being.  Geogre 12:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

You poor thing, Geogre. My family is suffering from winter colds at the moment (one case of sinusitis and another of ear infection) but your condition sounds much nastier. Reports of the operations for "the stone" make ones eyes water, so let us hope that it is not that and the drugs works. Get well soon. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The other condition -- what they do to crack the walnut is even more horrid.  The procedure itself is not as graphic, not as gruesome, but the post-surgical complications are terrible.  Go, magic bullets, go!  Geogre 15:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The fever broke! The actual pain and stuff is still present, but at least the infection is going away. (Had some fun in a CT scan tunnel last night.) Geogre 11:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Glad you're feeling happier. Geogre is there room in that peaceful little cylinder of XRays for me too? tonight I have seen the biscuit (I think that's an English metaphor - don't worry ALoan if it is not) some woman, known to her friends as Hyacinth, now thinks I've likened  her to the murderer of 40,000 people .  If I thought it would work I'd probably consider suicide tonight - but the way the day has gone I'd probably miss and waste a perfectly good bullet.  It's all very tiresome; but tomorrow is another day - as Shakespeare said. Giano | talk 21:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Now I have to look. Killer of 40,000 only? Not Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot? That's at least original. The CT scan was a bore, but everything else has been a ride of thrills and chills. The sharp pains are no fun, and now I'm walking like an old man. Ok, like an older man. Every 10 minutes I pronounce myself cured, and every other 10 minutes I pronounce myself ready for the hearse. It's like that. As for Wikipedia -- it's a website. None of these people are real, except me. I'm too odd to be invented. Bishonen's real, but with a different face and name. All the rest...pixels and bytes. Geogre 22:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Different? Face? Different from what? And not actually named Bishonen in RL? Surely you jest. Bishonen | ノート 22:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC).
 * [[Image:Tulipface.jpg|right|frame|I assume Bishonen's RL face looks nothing like this artist's impression of her Wikipedia face.]]
 * Don't you call me a pixel! or sick or not I'll punch your face in Giano | talk 22:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd like a video of that, if you drag yourself off your sickbed to go do it, Giano. Thanks much. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ohhh, great tulipface! I wish it did! That would be too cool for words. :-) Bishonen | ノート 00:23, 23 March 2006 (UTC).

I'm sorry, but I make it a rule never to argue with the imaginary people in my head. Geogre 02:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocking user at FAC
Actually, I did not bully anyone or act inappropriately anywhere on the We Belong Together FAC. Do you care to point out a place where I did? Bcrowell2 and Tsavage posted comments anonymously and based on what I've read at Vandalism, I believed that they were vandals attempting to place words into the mouths of both users. Therefore, I acted very appropriately by reverting the edits. Secondly, because Hollow Wilerding renominated Hollaback Girl at FAC countless times with constant failure, I one-hundred percent believe that you think I will just go ahead and reinsert it. Because of this, I feel obligied to ignore your "warning", however, considering there aren't any articles I've been working on to submit to FAC anytime soon at all, I'll probably keep to supporting, opposing, and commenting. But if there is one that I feel the need to submit, I probably will because I did nothing wrong on the page. I've notified other administrators.

Also, please leave me alone and refrain from following me around Wikipedia. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 22:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out not to take this personally. I'm also a bit irritated with people in my personal life, so I apologize if I offended you. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 22:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't play games. This is not up to you. Of course Raul654 supports my action, or I would hardly have undertaken it. I'm serious: you're banned from WP:FAC, and I want to see better behavior when you return. Bishonen | ノート 22:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Don't avoid responding on my talk page, please. I have you on my watchlist. And, once again, of course he supports your action: you've filled him with information that is primarily lies (such as the claim that I am Hollow Wilerding) which others would laugh about. I see that you did not read through the lines about the Vandalism note, which would have been obvious action and not speculation, so I've taken other actions. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 23:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just received your next message. "Removing Bcrowell's comments as inappropriate as that was"? Interesting. I see you read past the Vandalism and anonymous assumptions once again. And what in the world is assume good faith? A Wikipedia guideline? &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 23:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Oddly enough, I've recently discovered an article that I may nominate for featured article. Considering you ignored my messages and, as usual, believe that you are right when I was merely compromising with Vandalism, I may place it at the candancy page within the next day. Then again, maybe not... I may take a wikibreak. Yes, a better idea. However, by no means when I return will I not be appealing this inappropriate ban. Anyway, for now, I'll be gone for sometime and have indicated as so on my user page. Sayonara! &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 00:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Since you failed to provide me with the reasons why I deserve the block when I have re-checked my actions multiple times, the situation has become dead. If I find an article within the next two weeks and five days (or whatever it is) that I find appropriate for featured status, then I will nominate it. It should not be solely up to you to make such decisions. No one owns Wikipedia and we are an international community about international cooperation. I don't find your attitude in this category at all; people are not banned from clubs or wherever and then not explained the reason and told to "figure it out themselves". &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 23:57, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Does your constant whining on my page qualify as me "following you around Wikipedia"? Bishonen | ノート 00:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Don't play games with me. Should you "ban" me from anything when you don't provide reasons, are in the minority, and bother me anymore, I'm opening an RFC. Sysops are supposed to present the best in a user. Your constant excuse for everything doesn't strike me as genuine. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 02:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

You know what? Truth be told, I don't understand why we both have to be so stubborn. I know that you're just infuriated with me because you still believe I'm Hollow Wilerding, and I'm just being stubborn because I dislike these accusations. We really need to refrain from being so dark-blooded. Perhaps we should make a friendly approach instead of causing controversy everywhere we go. It's good that you're an administrator, actually, since you're not a fainthearted person and will block someone when they're disruptive; however, sometimes (not always) I think you should do it in a nicer manner. Why don't we accomplish something? I will comply with your "ban" as long as you don't put me out of place, insult me, or purposely refer to me as female. Ignorance is not the key, and I know that I've probably violated civility already, so I should be ashamed. But really, there's no reason for screaming, and I will continue to stand on the grounds of telling me what I did wrong on FAC. I can't correct what I don't know. I could make the same mistakes next time without being aware of the circumstances and I'll be blocked all over again, which would definitely leave me perplexed. Is there a particular article you're working on? Do you want help? Should I assist you? Perhaps I could use some help? I'm not sure. Remember, this is an encyclopedia built to develop history &mdash; there is no reason why people should be making enemies. It isn't like we're ever going to meet each other personally and communicate through satillites (spelling?). Do me the favour complying with these words I write so that a pointless conundrum is not refueled in the future. Another thing, however, I still believe the admins who agree with this ban are clearly agreeing with it by bad-faith. Otherwise, there is no reason why we should be breaking the rules. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 03:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That sounds quite encouraging. I do not wish to make you lose face at all; I accidentally used the word "she", purely out of habit and with being in a hurry. I really do believe you're male. Of course I've no way of knowing, I could be wrong, but it's what I believe. There have been no accusations from me that you're HW, you know. I don't have control of what other people post, but I have never incited anybody into accusing you of that, and never will. I fully understand your suspiciousness, and that you think I may come out with references to ancient history at any time, but I haven't the slightest intention of doing that. It would go against my own interests to tease or taunt you. I'd much sooner have you be a calm, productive user, than stirred up.
 * About what you did wrong on FAC, that you ask to be able to avoid inadvertently doing again: see this post of mine and this by Taxman. If it's necessary for your dignity to argue every detail of every accusation, then I'm sorry, but I don't play that game, this is all I can do. Please just read my links with the eyes of good faith and you will see what the charges are. If you think someone like Taxman is in a conspiracy against you, well... My e-mail offer still stands. Bishonen | ノート 09:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Thank you for finally answering my questions. It should have been like this from the beginning instead of controversial. But do not worry, I am all right with it. I'm not sure whether you truly believe I am HW or not, but it is all right if you think I am, because such as you said about me being male or female, you'll never know. :)
 * Unless I missed it in one of your posts, what is the e-mail offer? (Please respond on my talk page, thanks.) &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 20:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * All right, I will respond through e-mail. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Everyking's block
Hi, Haukur, this is just to let you know I've responded to your comment at WP:RFAR; I stupidly posted in the middle of the whole rather messy thread, after your first comment, so I thought you might easily miss it. You made a very good point, but I'm not sure you were aware of all the circumstances. Best, Bishonen | ノート 00:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC).


 * Yes, I saw it. Thanks for explaining politely. Haukur 00:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry :( Your feathers are pretty. Love the balloon article. Haukur 10:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Simon Byrne
Is now in main space (complete with the amazing foot note system!) It's not been completed to the standard I would have liked, but there was not a lot more I could find out about him, in fact I think this is probably the most complete page anywhere - so it will have to do, perhaps someone somewhere out there can add more. Thanks for the help. Giano | talk 21:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * A would be Doctor writes: Please do not tamper with important medical facts   many people read my informative pages in the hope of finding solace and medical help to alleviate nasty and unpleasant conditions and infections.  Your tampering could cause permanent disablement, death, of worse.  Kindly desist forthonce or you will be banned as a medical danger! Giano | talk 09:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I see, I see, that's the thanks I get for trying to share my synesthetic insights that could vastly improve both the article and your blinkered mind if given half a chance. Quite so. Bishonen | ノート 10:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC).


 * Ah Synesthetic an album of what I beleive is popular music - one of yours? Can we look forward to a whole series of FAs from you on subjects with such popular appeal. I'm afraid I am not the one who could advise you on such a subject. A Doctor
 * I am aware of where the link leads, but this regrettable Ignorantopedia site lacks an article on Synestheticism! So I linked the best I could, and thought it might be sufficient to send you to dictionary.com. But probably not. Your envy of my corner in the wonderful untapped field of balloon articles shines through, naturally. I think Henri Lachambre may be next. Bishonen | ノート 12:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Is synestheticism different from Synaesthesia? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Or syncretism? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Very different actually (seriously). Masses of goats. What I don't like is the way the New Messages banner now says "You have new messages (last chance)." I'll never get another message?? :-( And yet I always do. Bishonen | ノート 19:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Is a peculiar synaesthesia causing you to perceive the letter 'g' as 'c'? Or is "last change" just too close to a too-common phrase? You could always take it up at MediaWiki:Newmessagesdifflink. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I may simply have gone deaf. :-). Bishonen | ノート 20:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Synecdoche? -- ALoan (Talk) 21:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah. Thank you. No, not really, only with more goats. The sense of smell is central. Bishonen | ノート 18:22, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Well BoG as far as mixing of the senses goes - some of us seem very confused at the moment, and I don't mean me! In my capacity as a self taught Doctor would you like some advice? Giano | talk 18:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to stick to the goats. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:33, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you stick it to the goats, you'll get an infection worse than mine! Geogre 00:25, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * My loving goats and I resent that remark. Oregon isn't the American South; what happens between a man and his livestock is a private matter here. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, milch goats, meat goats, and loving goats? It sounds like Thor, but a goat is incapable of giving informed consent unless it has been manumitted.  Geogre 03:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well I would not go up in a balloon he made, it doesn't sound like they were very good; in fact I would not be so stupid as to go up in a ballon again at all, once over the Valley of the Kings was quite sufficient, I kept thinking I was about to join the great deceased down below, not to mention the circling vultures who kept trying to peck holes in the balloon.  I like to here an engine keeping me up there.  I did once go up in a microlight, but that was very terryfying a little bit like sitting on an agitated lawnmower held together with an elastic band that was about to ping at any moment.  Anyhow I can't stay here all day, I have to go and sort somebody our elsewhere, who need an explanation of my views on another subject! Giano | talk 13:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the cleanup
Thanks for cleaning up my talk page. Amazingly, that vandal seems to have responded to my requests to stop posting penises. How unexpected! --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 17:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Did he really? I thought he seemed to be keeping his pecker up, I mean I thought he was going right on, so in view of the warnings and the blocking history, I blocked for a month. Of course do feel free to unblock if you think he was anyways going to, er, withdraw. Bishonen | ノート 18:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC).

Compliments and questions
My compliments for S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897 - that's one great article! One thing that might be expanded is about the search efforts, but I did not mention that on FA because it's not really a deficit - just an idea where the article could be expanded. (I happen to have written a stublet about another foolhardy amateur polar explorer of the time, Theodor Lerner, who was involved in the search during his own ambitious voyages in Svalbard, and I seem to remember reading about the search in my Svalbard history book and perhaps I'll add something if I can find it again.)

Did you happen to stumble over any archives of historical Svalbard pictures? I am still searching for a few historical pictures for my pet article, Bjørnøya, which seems to need a final push to make it to FA (see also Talk:Bjørnøya), so if you had sources or pictures I'd appreciate any help. My complimenrts again, Kosebamse 09:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I appreciate it! I'll try to provide a short paragraph like you suggest. (I really like short articles, but the ones I write just always seem to turn into long articles.) Do add something, please,that would be most helpful. I don't own a Svalbard history book, and know hardly anything about the high latitudes or the explorations. I just read up on this episode, in a shallow way; no stumbling over any archives, I'm afraid. For the rescue efforts, I think the Swedish govt just checked out the two depots a year or two after they disappeared, by icebreaker. Of course the ships had to wait for reasonable ice conditions, and they hadn't a clue where else to look, but it's a sobering thought: those poor miserable klutzes surely couldn't have kept themselves alive that long even at a depot: they would have died even if they'd made it to Cape Flora. A charged moment is when an expedition comes looking for Umberto Nobile and his airship on Kvitöya in 1928, and apparently walk all over Andrée's campsite without noticing it, as there was a lot of snow that year.


 * Bjørnøya looks very good. Have you planned of having a map of the island, as well as the map showing its position? I kind of missed something like that. Those are some great self-taken pics you've got. I don't suppose you and your camera have been to Kvitøya? Andrée said it was nearly all covered by a glacier, hence = the white island. (It wasn't me called it "White's Island".)


 * Miseryfjellet, heh heh. :-) Bishonen | ノート 18:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC).


 * There are maps linked to from the article but I am afraid I can't upload them, as they are copyrighted. It is difficult to find good quality information about that desolate island, and even more so if you look for English language sources. In fact, most of my knowledge is from Norwegian books. The Norwegian Polar Institute has a long list of books and publications on its web page, but very few are available online. I have not made the pictures myself, they are from a fellow German who has been there with his own yacht a few years ago.
 * The name "Kvitøya" is indeed derived from the geography and refers to the heavy glaciation. Sorry, no pictures and it will be difficult to find any, as that place is really remote (and also a nature reserve, I believe). A fascinating subject, the heroic (and grotesque) age of polar exploration. It is interesting to compare figures like Lerner and Andree with Amundsen or Nansen, who managed to overwinter unplannedly on Franz Josef Land and return in good health. Nansen's journey reports were bestsellers of their time and will probably still make a good introduction to the science of the time (have not read them yet). So much to read...
 * Thanks and see you later, Kosebamse 20:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Nansen was a man of many gifts. The impossibility of communicating with the outside world must have been part of the glamor and the heroism, too. Nansen and his companion disappear into the unknown...they're gone... they're gone... they must be dead... they're obviously dead... good heavens [18 months later], there they are, as fresh as paint! My first thought when I read about Andrée was that Andrée vs. Nansen in the Arctic was a lot like an early version of Amundsen vs Scott in the Antarctic. Balloons and Siberian ponies. Those crazy guys. Bishonen | ノート 21:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC).
 * (Or rather, other way round: Andrée/Nansen = Scott/Amundsen.) Bishonen | ノート 21:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC).


 * Bish - You may not have noticed, but Bjørnøya has had a FAC and a PR already. I agree, it is pretty good. -- ALoan (Talk) 08:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I hadn't, thanks, Al. It was interesting in relation to my page too, especially the hard line on image galleries. Though when I posted accordingly on the "At least I got played by Max von Sydow" FAC, Uppland suggested galleries might be becoming "reprecated". Anyway, the sense of the meeting seems to support my wish for lots of these remarkable images. What a pity that Kosebamse's nomination apparently foundered on the image copyright issue—if that was merely because it's hard to reach the uploader, it's almost infernal. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 18:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC).

Byrne
It's getting there! Giano | talk 22:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Elizabethan Theatre with bonus penguins!
Since you are a literary type and since your talk page has become a salon for literary types, I pray that you will allow a bit of shameless advertising here (for a good cause). I'm here to promote the newly minted, bright and shiny, WikiProject Elizabethan theatre!

Ok, shameless advertising over, I'll leave you another creature to add to your menagerie of bears, mocking birds, goats, tulips (!?!), and whatnots. Enjoy a sweet Emperor penguin (with bonus baby, awwwwww)!
 * What, no WikiProject Restoration theatre? And here I just bought the new(ish) Nell Gwyn bio. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hiya, Gan! Awwww, cute flightless creatures to keep the flapping turkey in countenance! Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 03:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Wow... um... In Soviet Russia, the tulipface signs you? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Not yet at least...in the near future I certainly think one will be established. My next project (in breaking up Theatre into smaller, bite-size chunks) will be Ancient Greek theatre. But Restoration theatre may soon follow. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 03:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I feel bad for teasing - I looked at the Wikiproject there, and it's quite lovely. Nice work. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Nah, don't feel bad. Restoration theatre was on my list of future projects before you said anything. Thanks for the compliment. I hate the format of other WikiProjects so I decided to spice it up a bit. WikiProject Theatre has pretty much the exact same layout. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 04:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Carnildo's RFA
A bit of a tone there, wasn't there? Was it absolutely necessary? Bishonen | ??? 16:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC).

Well you have asked two very different questions there haven't you. I hope this not only answers your questions, but makes Gmaxwell understand the Carnildo's behaviour and the Arbcoms response left a lot of anger and emotion behind which sometimes finds the wrong, or at least nearest target.

Tone? The tone sounds to me a little like that of a barrister discrediting the defence's star witness. Necessary? I don't suppose anyone can say with certainty. The problem is that like it or not this particular RFA is even more a trial than most, the fault for that must lie mostly with the Arbcom who in their original "trial" achieved the near impossible result of satisfying neither offender or offended. It is an impossible task to be  both judge and jury. Jury's may (and indeed should) squabble legitimately, Judges have to be experienced and absolute in their conviction the sentence is appropriate. Sentencing by committee is always a weak affair of compromises.

Thus, Carnildo seems to consider himself still to have done nothing worthy of such unjust treatment, and the offended (I can only speak for myself) feel that before being eligible for reapplication he should have at least have had to realise how offended people were by his actions, or at least been forced to wait much  longer than than the minimum two weeks specified. That the clerk of the court was on Carnildo's page asking him to apply for adminship at the immediate end of that period appeared to me tasteless. On that occasion Carnildo had the sense to decline, but in my opinion should have waited longer still. Let us not forget here Carnildo accused three experienced editors (2 of them admins) of "hate speech" a serious charge in any community, found them guilty and banned them all in the space of a few minutes. Then having caused the situation walked away and left others to sort his appalling mess out. That in itself, should have bought a further charge of is neglect of responsibility. Remember all three he banned were completely innocent, one has left and the two remaining seem to be very hurt still. None have received any explanation or apology from Carnildo.

So there you have it - a whole sorry saga of injustice still claiming victims. I'm truly sorry that GMaxwell has chosen to express in an edit summary he is "hurt" by my treatment of him. He should not have ever been able to find himself in the position of having to defend Carnildo - his loyalty to his friend is a credit to him and I hope he edits again, but he must realise there is far more at stake here than Carnildo being able delete a few images in the future. As for GMaxwell's suggestion about moving on - Certainly I hope so at some time in the future, but with no seeming  atonement at all from Carnildo, and so many people voting for Carnildo and thus making light of one's own hurt on the matter it is very hard. I'm go glad you supported me there. Thanks. Giano | talk 08:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Finn Malmgren
You're not inclined to continue with your Swedisharcticexplorercruft and write about Finn Malmgren? He died in 1928, in roughly the same neighbourhood and under similar circumstances as the Andrée expedition. u p p l a n d 16:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I'm more tempted by Umberto Nobile. Or else a whole series of Swedish Flops Through the Ages, since people seem to like reading about that! The Regalskeppet Vasa next, perhaps. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 17:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC).


 * We seem to be lacking Category:Swedish flops. What about Category:Flops by nationality? Nope, not that either. u p p l a n d 17:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Yet another FA!

 * Heh heh, thanks, G'como. I didn't know, I was just typing a new reply to Piotrus. (I guess I'll message him on his page.) Trying to figure how I'm going to rest on my laurels if they're behind my ear. Advanced yoga position? Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 08:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Why have you got an acorn behind your signature, is it some Swedish Secret Squirrel organisation? Giano | talk 08:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It is actually so secret that Bishonen will deny it even being an acorn. This message will self-destruct after you have read it. Or maybe it won't. u p p l a n d 08:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, the Wiki article got me interested so I read the Polish article (linked as a gallery below) and it has - among other things - a large discovery section.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It does? Maybe you could write a short discovery section, then? (Though I admit I've got lots of info available in the books I used, too.) I wish I could have drawn more attention, somehow, without getting unencyclopedic about it, to the Polish site as an image resource, it's fantastic. The web is full of miserable poor-quality thumbnails (falsely claiming to be copywright of the Andrée museum, yet), and then there's this unique, generous collection. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 13:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC).

How Ya Been?
Greetings, Bishonen! We haven't talked in a long-time. I hope you are doing well. I saw your comment on Requests for adminship/Carnildo 2 and wanted to say I agree completely with your assessment. When I first encountered Carnildo on the WP:FAC pages I looked him up and was surprised to see he was an administrator. How did that happen, I wondered? Then when I saw that he was trying to get back almost immediately after being desyopped (and desyopped for very good reason), I of course voted no. Anyhow, what have you been working on lately? I've just got Katie Holmes and Bruce Johnson to featured status. By my count, thirteen articles I've written have made it to "featured." (See List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations.) Ave!PedanticallySpeaking 17:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, this and that. I'm trying to think of some nice article subject to start on right now. That's lovely about all the FAs! :-) Carnildo really shot himself in the foot with the way he replied to me, I reckon. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 17:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Did you see the reply he posted on the RFA to my vote? PedanticallySpeaking 15:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Passive aggressive message
So here's one of those passive-aggressive American messages, where I come seeking criticism but probably really just want praise or attention; you know the drill. Have a look at Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, 1663–1672. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's so great, what a good idea! You know, there's an FA waiting to happen, it's a subject just the right size. :-) Let me just check up on the pre-Great Plague early playhouses on the site, because there were two. Don't know if Beauclerk conflates them? That happens a lot. Yours, the "Theatre in Bridges Street" (although the site was the same), that seated 700, opened in May 1663 and burned down in January 1672. Then the big one, the "Theatre in Drury Lane", seating/standing 2000, opened in 1674. See Restoration spectacular, section "Changeable scenery". And I passively-aggressively re-embiggened the pencil sketch which, once upon a time, I lovingly scanned, and which somebody had shrunk before you got there. Grumble. With those light-grey lines on light-grey paper, you couldn't tell the subject from a hole in the ground, the size it was at. Much better not to use it at all. Grumble grumble. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 07:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC).

Thanks
WOW!! Two of my favorite admins noticed my plea!! Appreciate the release -- and the attention. Best Wishes. WBardwin 08:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Dmcdevit's message didn't show up for me till I pressed Save, for some reason. Looks like you're on quite a few watchlists, at least! Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 08:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC).

The price of fish
Surströmming is apparently a "dangerous weapon"! (Brought to you by the delightful http://www.fishupdate.com, which even quotes our article). -- ALoan (Talk) 13:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That is the most disgusting thing I have ever read! Giano | talk 13:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL, I think I might start a statistical survey of comments from subscribers to this page. Giano's contribution there would definitely be in the running for "most frequent". Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 15:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC).

The Box Fop at Drury Lane

 * "Such little Insects still are swarming here,
 * Buzzing dull Jests each in his Ladies Ear;
 * Then laugh aloud, which now is grown a part
 * Of jaunty breeding, and of Courtly art:
 * The true sign of the modish Beau Garson,
 * Is chatt'ring like a Lady's lewd Baboon;
 * Shewing their teeth to charm some pretty Creature
 * For grinning, among Fops, is held a Feature.
 * Nor is this all; they are so oddly drest,			}
 * You'd think God meant 'em for a standing Jest,			}
 * Ap't into Men for pastime to the rest:				}
 * Observe 'em well, you'l think their Bodies made
 * To wait upon the motion of the Head:
 * Their Cravat-strings and Perukes so refin'd,
 * They dare not tempt their Enemy, the Wind:
 * Of the least slender puff each Sot afraid is,
 * It kills the Curls design'd to kill the Ladies.
 * So stiff they are, in all parts ty'd so strait,
 * 'Tis strange to me the blood shou'd circulate.
 * But leaving these Musk-cats to publick shame,
 * I'l turn my Head, and seek out other Game." (The Play-house: A Satyr, by Robert Gould, 1692 ed., ll. 226-245).

If you want to read the Satyrs version of the poem, you need me. It was reprinted in The London Stage, but that was the Works version of 1709 (which may be superior, but it's not as mean). Geogre 15:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

It's addictive!


 * "Discharg'd of these, let's look another way,
 * And mind those Fops that seldom mind the Play.
 * A harmless jest, an accidental blow,
 * Touching their Cuffs, or treading on their Toe,
 * With many other things, too small to name,
 * Does blow the Sparks of Honour to a flame;
 * For such vile trivles, or some viler Drab,
 * They roar, they swear,look big, lug out and stab.				270
 * No mild perswasion can these bruits reclaim;
 * 'Tis thus to night, to morrow 'tis the same.
 * Murder's so rife, with like concern we hear
 * Of a Man kill'd as baiting of a Bear.
 * All people now (the Age is grown so ill)					275
 * Before they go to a Play shou'd make their Will;
 * For with much more security, a Man
 * Might make a three years Voyage to Japan.
 * Here others, who, no doubt, believe they're witty,
 * Are hot at Repartee with Orange-Betty...." (ibid ll. 263 - 80)

And then we get to the people who go to the play solely to arrange where they're going to meet after the play, and then we get to the dangers of actually trying to go home after the play, with all of these idiots and killers on the streets with their whores. What a fun poem. Geogre 15:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * What a coincidence, I just this minute made an attempt to show where the fop box was at Drury Lane, using my cutting-edge photoshopping skills to put little figures and arrows into the Wren playhouse section in Restoration spectacular. (What are you talking about? Yes, they're ARROWS, don't be like that! All you have to do is look at them from across the room and squint a little!). Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|13px]] talk 16:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC).

Can you find your copy of my edited version of The Play-house? If so, you might want to read it, because the poem visits every part of the theater, from the pit to the box to the gallery. It's quite logically ordered and easier to read for me now than once it was (more obvious). Some of the poetry is pretty bad, as poetry (first excerpt, above, is way too sloppy versifying), and some of it is excellent. Needless to say, the 1709 version is its superior in most respects, but not more honest or sincere. The 1689 version has all the marks of a hot wound on the sensibilities, and the 1709 a philosophical denunciation of the vanity of the Restoration stage. Geogre 20:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Hopkins School FAC
Hi Bishonen! Thank you again for your assisstance and advice on improving Hopkins School, I have nominated it as an FAC once again, and I hope the article is good enough to garner your support! Staxringold 16:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You have nothing to feel bad about, you are voting how you believe will keep Wikipedia in prime form. I would ask you to reconsider given the slightly retagged campus map and the fact that it was released for use on Wikipedia, and is simply of higher quality than any self-created one would be. As for the Heath Commons image, I have two requests out (one to release the current version into GFDL, another to a buddy with a nicer camera and better photographic sense to take a new shot under GFDL) to replace/tag it. Staxringold 20:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, sure, I'm not expecting to have reason to keep opposing—you're going to try to deal with Carnildo's objection in any case, aren't you? No, I hope to withdraw that objection, but I had to make it, over the photo of the school: I mean, it's a building that's right there, today, you and probably other interested editors of the article are near it, there are cameras in the world...! That one's really the sticking point for me. Though I'm not happy about the new tag on the campus map, either. I mean, "Featured" means "Wikipedia's best", right? A tag beginning "If possible, please do not use this tag" doesn't give me that "best" feeling. Er, why did you change it? Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|14px]] talk 20:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC).
 * I have proposed some solutions I hope are suitable to sway your vote. Thanks for the advice! As for the re-tagging, I did so because it is the more appropriate fair use tag, as the image was released with permission for use on Wikipedia, it was not merely collected from a random place on the internet, as with most Fair Use images. Staxringold 20:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have removed the two remaining fair use images pending re-release of them under a free license, replacement with a free license image, or permanent removal with no free alternative. I hope you consider this action sufficient to at least withdraw your objection and hopefully support the article eventually. I apologize if my comment came off wrong on the FAC. Thanks again! Staxringold 21:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for withdrawing your oppose vote. I've reworked some of the history section per your suggestion, and I hope it can eventually be fixed enough to garner an actual support. If you need a little extra content, I can check Chronicles of Hopkins Grammar School on weekdays (librarian won't let me take such an old book out of the library). Staxringold 23:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very very much for the detailed copyedit, and of course for your support! LMK if I can ever help with anything in the future, as you've been a huge help here. Staxringold 11:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

RFA
What you said on Carnildo's RFA made me smile, not the anti-anybody part, just that Wikipedia has a problem that hasn't been properly addressed. I feel a tiny bit validated, but that's a long road back, luckily i've stopped using Wikipedia on a regular basis so the nightmares are less severe. I hope all is well in Sweden, thank you for cheering me up. Karm a  fist Save Wikipedia 23:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

19th century prints and copyright
Hi. There are two things that we need to know to be sure that a work is in the public domain in the U.S. One is when the work was published. If the work was published before 1923, it is in the public domain. Many works are not published until long after they are created, and not every 100+ year-old work has been published. If it wasn't published, the work is copyrighted for 70 pma, so we need to know the date of the author's death. If the author died before 1923, the work is in the public domain. If not, it isn't. It is even conceivable that a work published 150 years ago could still be copyrighted, if the author of the work was young enough to live another sixty-some years. The template Template:PD-art is actually making an even stronger claim; that the author died more than a hundred years ago and the work is therefore out of copyright in every jurisdiction. I'm not about to go hunt down every hundred-year-old image and tag them as having no source, but they shouldn't be tagged Template:PD-art if we don't have any information on either publication or the date of the author's death. Template:PD-old-70 is likely more appropriate, but it would still be good to fill in the information we need to be sure of the claim. Jkelly 08:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Er... upon re-reading that, I clearly need to review basic math. The author would need to live for fifty years beyond having produced an one-hundred and fifty year old piece of art for the Template:PD-art tag to be wrong.  Here is a chart that explains everything better than I did above.  Jkelly 09:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, some things are now clearer to me, but not the basic thing. See, you make contradictory statements about the relation between publication and author's death, and that relation is often precisely the problem for me:


 * 1) "If the work was published before 1923, it is in the public domain."


 * 2) "If the author died before 1923, the work is in the public domain. If not, it isn't."


 * I would love for (1) to be true, it would make my life simpler, but if (2) is true, (1) can't be. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|14px]] talk 09:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Here is a great little site I refer to all the time when I am doing the day job having to priduce evidence and stuff  With Wiki where people tend to be more copyright conscious tha the real world I generally just look at the the of a work of art, if the artist is unknown I assume he painted it aged 14, then I work out if he lived to be 102 could he still be alive.  If he is possibly 103 - I murder him! and upload the work. Giano | talk 09:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * PS: don't forget in the UK Copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work (including a photograph) lasts only until 70 years after the death of the author. Giano | talk 09:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Jkelly and Giano, thanks, I'll keep both your links, but I admit I'm not gonna spend today getting my mind round them. Why does this stuff have to be so eye-glazing??? Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|14px]] talk 10:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC).

Scholarly question
For information on what plays were acted, and where, one turns to the Stationer's Register for the Tudor period. However, if I want to know what was put on at Covent Garden 1730-1737, what source do I get? I actually need to know. (Yes, I know that The London Stage has some, but isn't there a Wing and Redgrave like source?) Geogre 15:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Afraid not. Collecting that information is so different from compiling a bibliographical list, because the sources are a lot more various. Consider the letter home from Prince Cosmo III of Tuscany... !. There's a typical LS source. And the obvious format for it is a calendar, which is what LS is. The LS doesn't have "some", it has what there is. In the Restoration period what there is is extremely incomplete, and the sources are a ragbag, headed by Pepys and such as Cosmo. In the 18th century, the info fattens up amazingly just around the turn of the century, most performances get recorded, and the main sources are newspaper advertisements. I'm sorry, is LS not available to you? Not to me either, except I've got the 1660-1700 volume right here... [clutches it and scuttles off]... My preccccciousssss...! P.S. After the Licensing Act, I suppose there's some kind of list of licensed plays. But I haven't heard of it as being available or anything, no doubt because all its info plus a crapload more will be in LS. Anyway, that wasn't the period you wanted. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|14px]] talk 16:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC).
 * 1730-1737? Shoot. Is this what I think it is? Has a draft of the 1700-1729 sections of an updated version of LS crept onto the web? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure it is. I was just looking at it myself, thinking of mentioning it to Geogre, but it's still just 1700-1710, as far as I can see. In fact, I suspect Hume and Milhous (my lares and penates, look at the Restoration Spectacular sources) have given up on doing those .pdfs, the whole thing is looking exactly like it's been doing since forever. Maybe some funding was withdrawn. But if you should come across a more extensive version, do please let me know. Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|14px]] talk 17:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC).

I suppose I'll e-mail the British Library to see if they know of a sourcebook. The information has to be compiled in primary sources somewhere. Because it's 1730-1737, I figure the information should be out there. (By the way, I'm having a relapse and am running 38.2 and 37.78 C fevers, with weakness, headache, confusion, etc. It's freezing or boiling at all times to me, too.  I'll be knocked out of work again tomorrow, probably.  Geogre 01:27, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry you feel bad, sweetheart! And sorry you don't believe me, too, but that'll be from the confusion. ;-) How do you mean "has to be compiled in primary sources", are you gonna check out the newspaper advertisements from 1730—37 for yourself...? Bishonen [[Image:Bishface.tulip.png|14px]] talk 08:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC).

You know as well as I do that the Master of Revels had to still record and approve plays before the Licensing Act. That's what I mean by a primary compilation. Until 1715, no one put on a play without a license (but the licensing didn't have any teeth, really), and when the change took place in 1715, it was because the Drury Lane folks figured that they had a Royal patent and therefore didn't need a license. If no one has made a compilation of all the MoR records, then that's a thing that still needs to be done. Geogre 11:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow, the amazing things I learn here in Bishonen's Salon. I temble in the presence of all of you. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Trembled too much to notice my turkey flapping its wings at you, did you, Gan? Bishonen | talk 16:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * I'm afraid so...*hangs head* I've been so involved with Elizabethan theatre (I'm reading Henry V for the first time right now), designing a new user page, a production of Purlie at a local theatre, a play i'm writing, and some 20 books i'm reading simultaneously I think I glanced at the note but its significance didn't cross my mind. Forgive me! I shall go read something from the Restoarion drama in addition to my Monty Python penance. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 19:09, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, for... no, please, your penance is that you get to go read my balloon page, I want to know what you think of it! Never mind the ¥”¢¢‰¶\{}≠} Restoration! Bishonen | talk 19:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC).


 * Gannymede, what a lot of people end up doing is asking these sorts of primary research questions. There is amazing, amazing stuff that was compiled in the 19th century, and we're all parasites on it, but those 19th century positivists didn't finish the job.  They loved their Shakespeare, so, if you want the Stationer's Register, you're in luck.  Later ones liked the Restoration a little, so some compiled spotty records there.  Beyond that...well...one just hopes.  Further, the game is up.  Back in the 19th c., people could live in the British Library, touch and maul the original records, and take years to compile the data.  These days, you make an appointment in advance with the herald of the college of arms of London special privvy gate, and then you get 2 hours to look through a telescope at the originals, so no one is compiling the data, and publishers cluck their tongues and say that selling to every library on earth isn't enough.  Geogre 16:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm jealous...to be able to work years in an ivory tower such as that instead of giving my life to a soulless existance in corporate America sounds incredible. Alas! Alack! *sigh* Well, at least I have Wikipedia! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 19:09, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh? Grade my papers.  Somebody, please, grade my papers, dammit.  It ain't so grubless, unless you count the grub you can't buy with the money they pay, as it seems.  Still, can't complain...can't complain (or they'd fire me).  Bishonen, check to see if your local libraries have the following, eh?
 * P. Rawlings. Drunks, whores and idle apprentices: criminal biography in the 18th century. 1992.
 * It looks interesting, and it looks like a single Big Book of Criminal Fun. (Rawlings collects dozens of criminal bios from the 18th c.  It's not a book about them.  I looked on Amazon, and it's Attractively Priced for Institutional Libraries to buy only.)  Geogre 19:25, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Do you know the answer?
Ah Bishone Dear, just the sort of question you are so well placed to answer Giano | talk 11:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Blast from the past
I was surprised to encounter this did you know of its existence? Giano | talk 10:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. When I had the page deleted, I offered to temporarily undelete it for any non-admin who wanted to have a look. (Admins can do it themselves, and I didn't like the idea that it'd be viewable by admins only.) Babajobu asked, so I did, and stuck it in his space. I was sort of assuming that I'd re-delete it in a while, but he wanted to hang on to it, and I didn't want to make an issue of it. I think it might become a sore spot if we were in any way protective of it, I reckon this anything-goes-it's-a-wiki approach is better. Do you mind? How did you come across it? Would you like me to have a word with Baba about re-deleting it? Bishonen | talk 10:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * No, not at all, I was just curious as to why it was there. I had forgotten quite how funny it was, not having seen it for so long. Giano | talk 12:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is funny. :-) Your extended family does good work. Bishonen | talk 13:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC).

User:Bgully / Antifinnugor
Hi, I see you intervened against Bgully last time he tried to get Dbachmann, didn't you? You might want to look at his recent edit history. He's now been trying - with his usual lack of understanding of process - to bring an Arbcom case against us, including you. While he is clearly acting against your warning with this, we shouldn't maybe treat this attempt in itself as a renewed offence. If he wants Arbcom, let him get Arbcom, that's his right. However, I also think his repeated removal of the {unsigned} notice which I added to his earlier attack on me here warrants the interpretation that he is persistently upholding and endorsing that attack. --Lukas (T. 11:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, Lukas, thanks for getting in touch. I noticed even at the time that what Antifinnugor called his RFC against dab was actually using the RFAR template, and included attacks on me, so I assumed he was, if anything, actually going for arbcomming us. That's fine. I don't remember warning him against that, have you got a link? If I did, I'm sure it must have been purely in his own interest: I'm betting he doesn't understand that if arbcom accepts his request, they'll evaluate the behavior of everybody involved, him included. In other words, *I* don't mind being arbcommed by him — I wouldn't dream of treating it as an offense — but I don't think he would like the outcome. In fact, if I wasn't so tired of wasting my time giving good advice to Antifinnugor, who always receives it with the darkest suspicion, I would tell him to get an advocate. As you say, he doesn't understand process. P. S. Uh, Lukas, maybe I'm clicking on the wrong things in his contribs here — what specifically is there that shows him doing anything different with his RFC-cum-RFAR now, as compared to last time (round about when I banned him from ANI)? Bishonen | talk 11:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC).


 * As for your "warning", I was just referring to your post on his talk page, where it says "Stop it with your everlasting lies about User:Dbachmann "vandalizing" or I will blank and protect this page, and anywhere else where you do it." Which could be understood as warning him off trying to bring those complaints forward again anywhere. But I think we quite agree. Just thought you might want to know that he's been trying to bring this to a higher level now by going directly to Arbcom. Lukas (T. 13:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, I never dreamed what I said could be taken like that, but I see what you mean. Of course I wouldn't object to any kinds of accusations that were made in a Request for arbitration, or on a userpage where he's working on such a Request — those are indeed necessarily privileged, and I guess I was just assuming nobody could think I was referring to them. I was just hopping mad at the way he was spreading his lies and his anti-dab venom all over the place. Gosh, being on PA parole must have been the same as being gagged for him — he doesn't seem to have any other register than PA. And AFAIC he's most welcome to take anything he likes to the Arbcom. Yes, I think we do agree. Bishonen | talk 13:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC).

Okay, but pretentious
Featured article candidates/Sanssouci! I guess "looks okay" is a compliment, but it is funny how the colour of words means that they are less well written, and using more than one sylalble is apparently "pretentious"! -- ALoan (Talk) 15:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * "In which [=in the effort] all three members died" would do? I'm devastated by this insightful critique and feel sure Angr's own prose is a model of chastity. On another note, I agree in wishing Piotrus hadn't inserted that redlink. I did point out that it wasn't a nice place to have one, but he insisted on its importance (see the edit summaries). Bishonen | talk 15:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Hmm - perhaps we need a stub - "The race for the North Pole was an informal, if fierce, competition in the late 1800s to become the first person to visit the North Pole. Many people tried, and quite a few perished in the attempt.  The first person to succeed and live to tell the tale was [...], ... See also race to the South Pole." -- ALoan (Talk) 15:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, North Pole sets out the bare bones of the "race" quite well... -- ALoan (Talk) 15:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I will not be railroaded into writing an article about such a notion by people inserting redlinks. (That'll look great on the Main Page, as I told Piotrus.) What I will do, OTOH, is ....ta da! Race for the North Pole. Absurd, when North Pole is already linked? Tell me about it. Compromises do have a way of being absurd. Bishonen | talk 16:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Well, I've been perished since I moved to this cold freezing country, and there is nothing pretentious about me. Giano | talk 16:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Gaaaa! What's next, "kicked the bucket"? "Punched a one-way-ticket to the Pearly Gates"? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I have to wonder if this makes the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica a load or pretentious crap? *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 17:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Guys, guys, you're showing yourselves embarrassingly Python-ignorant here. Either do the right thing and say "Andrée is pushing up daisies, he has ceased to be" or get off my page. I can't afford to be seen in such company! Bishonen | talk 17:22, 31 March 2006 (UTC).


 * [edit conflict] Joined the choir invisible. In short, they are ex-polar explorers. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * THANK you ALoan! Bishonen | talk 17:27, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * I shall do penance this evening by watching Search for the Holy Grail for the 1,475th time. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 17:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm really ashamed of myself, for one. I can't believe I didn't make the "Norweigen Blue" connection. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Wailing and gnashing of teeth. Excccellent. Ganymead, please scroll up. Bishonen | talk 17:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC).

Norwegian Blue
You're welcome, shonen, I had momentarily thought you've lost your sanity... :-D What did you mean by "Norwegian Blue" though? Sounds like a new variety of salmon caviar. Pardon my ignorance. --BorgQueen 17:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Norwegian Blue parrot. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:46, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Check out the thread just above for why Giano altered "perish" and the reverts followed, My Tallest, after this unflattering remark on the balloon article by User:Angr. I blame ALoan, for my part. Anyway, Norwegian Blue is the kind of parrot that John Cleese attempts to return to the pet shop on the plea that it has ceased to be. Bishonen | talk 17:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Yes I've already seen his comment at FA nomination page (while I was keeping an eye on Stargate) and I agree his linguistic choice wasn't too persuasive. Still your action was extreme :-D As for the deceased blue parrot I've never been a fan of British comedy, except perhaps Absolutely Fabulous! --BorgQueen 18:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * ZOMG, what about Goodness Gracious Me? Bishonen | talk 18:11, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * I love the song but I don't think I've ever seen that program. In Korean cable network there have been very few British comedies aired, cos, you see, the sense of humour is one of the most sensitive areas affected by cultural differences. I'm reasonably familiar with Western pop cultures but often find the British sense of humour quite alien... and the French are worse... It's not necessarily always I can't laugh when Brits can - sometimes the other way around. If you haven't already, try Lair of the White Worm directed by Ken Russell; it is not supposed to be comedy, but I found the film completely hilarious. --BorgQueen 18:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * There is nothing better on a Friday night than getting lassied up and going out for an English. Order some bread rolls and something nice and bland, hmm, Jah-mez? -- ALoan (Talk) 00:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki on page locked for editing
I posted this link both in #wikipedia-en and #wikipedia but nobody reacted so I thought of asking you, to add iw links to a template that is locked for editing of mortals. See Template talk:Otheruses. // Habj 20:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Habj, not me, but hopefully one of the chatroom regulars. Bunch or ALoan? Would you? I don't do templates, I don't understand why it's locked, I can't figger what Habj wants me to do or how to do it. Oh, man, it's good to be a woman and be able to admit stuff like this without being shamed for life. :-) Bishonen | talk 20:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC).
 * Uh, I don't think we want an interwiki link from that template (or any other): when transcluded into a page, it would make the interwiki link appear in the transcluding page, wouldn't it? I guess it could go into one of those &lt;noinclude> sections, however that works, but what's the point? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Bunchofgrapes, you answers one of your concerns yourself - about the inclusion in other pages. The other one, regarding the point, is met on the talk page in question together with the first one. Please click on the link before you comment, thanks.
 * OK Bishonen, with those nicks in mind I'll try another go on the chat channel. Thanks for your time. (Lots of templates are locked just because vandalism on them. See the log on the page in question // Habj 22:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Whwe, I stand suitably chastised! Done it. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Habj, I was sort of joking about the "chatroom" — I meant this page of mine, and by "Bunch" I did mean Bunchofgrapes. Sorry for the misunderstanding, I should have been more clear. Bishonen | talk 23:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC).

Image question
In addition to everything I have been doing lately, i'm also trying to clear up some theatre image copyrights and such. I have noticed a number of images that are loaded to both Wikipedia and the Commons. When this occurs, isn't it usually common to delete the image on Wikipedia in favour of the Commons images or did I dream that? Thanks, as always!
 * Yes, it is. Definitely if they have the same name. If they don't, it would be the deleter's responsibility to go to all articles that have the en.wiki image and insert the Commons image instead--to "orphan" the image before deleting it. Are you sure that's what it is, though? I mean, a Commons image will have an en.wiki image page as well. But you probably knew that. Are you an admin yet, or do you need anything deleted?
 * Ah ha, well that explains why I keep finding images with both pages. But I must ask, what is the point? I have often found images in the Commons and used them directly from there without loading the image to en.wiki. I'm not an admin and while I don't have anything to delete now, I may need to soon. Thanks! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 22:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not making myself clear, I'm talking about images that exist only on Commons. They do nevertheless have a kind of ghostly en.wiki image page. Click on this one: Image:Andree.boardgame.png. I gave it that name and uploaded it to Commons, nowhere else. And yet when you click on it, for instance from an article, you get taken to an en.wiki image page. You might not notice that it says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons", but instead think that the file had been uploaded to both places; but it hasn't, and there's nothing that wants deleting. Were you thinking of those? (Whereas if they have been uploaded to both places, what you have is a mess, and the en.wiki one should be deleted.) As for why it's like that, search me. Bishonen | talk 07:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC).
 * Ok, thanks, I'm now perfectly clear on the subject. Those are the pages I was thinking of. Thanks! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S. I just finished reading your ballon article. How marvelous it is and so wonderfully illustrated! You are truly a valuable asset to Wikipedia and all of us who dwell in ivory towers. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 20:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You might consider writing this into a screenplay...I think you'd make some money!*Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 20:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Heh, thanks... yes, aren't those 1897 photos a treasure trove? And I discovered at a late stage that I could even use photos from 1930, when the expedition was found, like the one with the schoolchildren in the museum, because the Swedish copyright law is really good about photos. I was ready to faint with delight... funny how engaged one becomes, isn't it? The Andrée story became a novel which became a Swedish movie in 1982, Flight of the Eagle, which focuses I believe on Nils Strindberg and his fiancée. Got to have that love interest! (Actually the story of Andrée and his mistress is far more interesting, I wish I'd had room for it.) Bishonen | talk 21:30, 31 March 2006 (UTC).

Plano Senior High School PR request
I have noted your help of User:Staxringold (talk • contribs) in bringing the article Hopkins School closer to FA status. I was hoping that you might be able to comment on an article I just recently put up for peer review, Plano Senior High School. The peer review here. I hope that you will be willing to help put this article on the right path for featured article status. &mdash; Scm83x hook 'em 21:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a terrible reputation you've fostered, Bishonen. Plano! I lived in Plano for three years. Felt like twenty. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Tell me about it, Bunch. I thoughtlessly let myself be drawn in by User:Harro5. [Brooding darkly...] Yes... Harro5, that's it... and now he tells everybody about it... Giano! Any of those Sicilian cousins of yours, that are always keen to do you a favour, living in Australia these days? Tell 'em to bring the baseball bats and all the usual, and did you get the name? Harro5. (I'll take a look, Scm.) Bishonen | talk 07:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC).

Speaking of jokes
What howlers on the Main Page today. That article about main pages is a masterpiece of humor! What a roaring success! Hoo-hoo it is to hold one's sides with laughter. Oh, wait: that's right, it never developed. Humor by committee didn't actually work. Humor assigned seems to have not inspired people. Amazing. Who could have foreseen such a result? Geogre 13:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC) (for one)


 * I'm surprised that the completely silly hoax I posted on Wikipedia last April 1 is still around. It was a fake bio of a guy who went from the prestigious Stockholm School of Economics to becoming an IT entrepreneur sitting on the same corporate board as former Swedish prime minister Carl Bildt, and then going to America and making a career in porn movies under a silly pseudonym. I made him a novelist and a successful New York City real estate agent as well. Of course, all the "sources" were in Swedish. I suppose nobody bothered to check them. Some people have actually continued editing the article, even adding the proportions of certain bodyparts, obviously without any references. u p p l a n d 14:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Tups, I never would have believed such criminal activity from you of all people! I trust some responsible admin sees this belated confession and speedies the horror. Geogre, are you still there? I can't say I understand all of the article. "Penis length 8 inches thick" ...? Is this tentacle porn we're talking about? Bishonen | talk 15:23, 1 April 2006 (UTC).
 * Tups, BTW, that fake guy is really hot, too! My roommate has one of his videos. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe you or your roommate can confirm the measurements? Except that would be original research from a primary source, I guess. (I wonder what the Chicago Manual of Style says about referencing porn videos.) I'm tempted to remove them as basically unverifiable, but somebody will probably put them back. u p p l a n d 08:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Um, I didn't write that particular part of the article, and I doubt it was based on reputable sources. u p p l a n d 03:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW, I wonder if Eklund qualifies as a Bishōnen? u p p l a n d 06:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I can't act upon information learned in the confessional, the urinal, or your talk page. Still, I hope someone not bound by my oaths sees the confession and nukes the article from orbit (after putting a copy on Tups's user page). 8" thick? I don't think that's his penis.  Geogre 01:36, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Eklund was all over the Swedish newspapers last February-March or thereabout, when his book was released. I thought he was a sufficiently unlikely character to set off somebody's hoax or db-attack alarm if I created the article on April 1. I wonder if he was not nominated for deletion because a) nobody even noticed the page, b) it was sufficiently well-written not to be taken for a hoax, c) whoever did see it actually googled him and found some Börk börk börk hits that seemed more or less to corroborate what the article said, or d) I can't think of a fourth possible explanation but I'm sure there is one. u p p l a n d 06:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I am caught on the horns of a dilemma (always a painful place to be): is it the article that is the April Fool, or your claim that the article is an April Fool... -- ALoan (Talk) 11:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Everything in my original version from April 1 last year is verifiable. As for some of the porncruft added later, I don't know. Even if it can be found on some pornsite (and one isn't afraid to catch spyware and stuff visiting those), such businesses are about as reliable as online diploma mills in the claims they make about their products. But I posted the article hoping that somebody would think it was a hoax. I was greatly disappointed when nobody did and thought I'd try again this year, although it was admittedly less elegant to actively draw attention to the page than just letting somebody believe they had exposed a subversive hoax. (Is there an actual word for this? There should be.) u p p l a n d 12:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Double bluff, you scamster. Bishonen | börk börk börk 12:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC).

DNB ghost
Mary Hearne is the "novelist" in question. Check out her second novel, in particular. From the account I read of it, it sounds like a real Curllicism. Geogre 03:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Guess what?
I've finally come around to editing a Gwen Stefani article, though primarily just to keep the article's FA status strong and alive. This does not make me anymore HW than she had been while editing on Wikipedia. But the main reason I've come here is to tell you that I've renominated "We Belong Together" at FAC and would appreciate your input since you had objected during its first nomination. Any feedback is welcome and I will attempt to fix all of the errors you encounter or you believe require clean-up, correcting, etc.! Please respond on my talk page if you have any further information you'd like to discuss now, within the future, or never. Thanks. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 18:22, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * All right, I understand. Although Winnermario and I have never met personally, I heard she's a good girl when she's not mad. Can't take words solely, however, so who really knows. I'll refrain from posting any HW-related topics here anymore, because at this point I realize I have no power to persuade you, and I don't mind. Other than that, I will post important, Wikipedia-related messages here if I need to, and I do hope you eventually place your input at WBT. Again, thanks! &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * So, about Giano's message below. Was your latest post, below, "refraining from posting any HW-related topics here anymore"? Was it? Chat with Orane somewhere else, please. If you insist on provocation, you'll just have to take it as it comes, I'm afraid. Bishonen | börk börk börk 21:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC).
 * What a lot you hear. Bishonen | börk börk börk 22:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC).
 * Er, what? &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 00:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You're always coming out with a lot of information about that user and those connected with her, is what I mean. It's rather noticeable. Bishonen | börk börk börk 04:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC).
 * I apologise for nagging you :(. I'm really a nice guy, though :). Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  03:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear it. Bishonen | börk börk börk 04:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC).
 * Bishonen really needs to meet HW someday, yes, Orane? &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 20:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Excuse me Bishonen turn away for a moment. - Well Eternal Equinox it seems you have chosen to ignore the friendly advice I gave you - that's a pity.  Meet Bishonen?  You Holow Wilerding/Eternal Equinox or whatever you are currently calling yoursel -  the most disgraceful editor that Wikipedia has seen in years would like to meet Bishonen?  That audacity would make some people speechless, however that presumption is entirely in character for the multiple sockpuppet that is you, in short a non-person.  HW you really need to meet me someday on a professional basis. Believe me the pleasure would be entirely mine.  I have a true understanding of library services, Oh and random numbers - fascinating research, you wouldn't believe what one knows theses days.  why some people even loose their jobs, student places, whatever for abusing and breaching their employer's or provider's trust - can you believe that? - well best try!  Now, before the coldness and hostility that most decent editors of this encyclopedia feel towards you truly manifests itself - Go away and do something useful - preferably on another site.   Do I make myself quite clear? In short many people here hold you in complete contempt.   It is totally amazing to me that you (and I mean you in the singular) have not been permanently banned, and if I had anything to say in the matter that would have happened long ago. Now please (pretty pease - or whatever it is that is said in the backwoods you inhabit)  leave and go an play elsewhere, before this all becomes very unpleasant indeed.  Now as you were saying Bishonen......... Giano | talk 21:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Giano is in need of meeting HW as well, Orane! Perhaps authority is scandolous after all. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 20:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Family forest
Have you seen the new Familytree template? It is now possible, with the help of a ridiculous amount of strange wiki-code (producing an enormous amount of even stranger HTML code) to make really good graphic "family trees" looking something like this or like this (removing the border and changing the background colour). I'm impressed. There were actually a number of pages already using this template. I can't imagine why I discovered it only last night. u p p l a n d 06:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Me, I can't imagine how I ever discover any template; mainly through people telling me about them, I guess, as you do now. Trying to think of something to use it for... got nothing yet. In fact, I'm altogether trying to think of something colorful to write a new article some more pretentious prose about. You know, with balloons, preferably. Got anything? Bishonen | börk börk börk 08:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC).


 * OMG - that is incredible, as outstanding at the timeline feature. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * ALoan, you're deleting stuff again, have you considered some sort of support group? Bishonen | börk börk börk 11:24, 3 April 2006 (UTC).


 * Well, perhaps an article/dab page on the Strindberg family, showing the relationship of August, Nils, and a few others. BTW, I just recalled that August mentions Nils in Inferno somewhere. He mentions having to correct somebody thinking he was the Strindberg going with Andrée to the North Pole.


 * Something colourful? With balloons? And heroic people being eaten by cute polar bear cubs, I presume? I can't really think of anything. Weren't you going to write something about The Famous Henri Lachambre and his troop of Flying Elephants? Or Regalskeppet Vasa? The presence of balloons and polar bears aboard the Vasa isn't very well-attested, as far as I know, but it probably needs more research. Other colourful topics? I had been thinking of writing about the History of diploma mills. Quite colourful, but it seems that some important references are unavailable in Swedish libraries. Carl Michael Bellman is a colourful Swedish topic which needs a lot of work, but, alas, lacking in balloonage. Or what about the poet and adventurer/fraudster Lars Wivallius?


 * On a related note, I was looking at the Airship and Zeppelin articles the other day and was lacking more on the internal construction of the ships. The latter says: "A comparatively small compartment for passengers and crew was built into the bottom of the frame. However, it is important to note that the small structure on the bottom of the large Zeppelins is not the entire habitable space of the craft; they often had crew or cargo space internally for aerodynamic reasons." I was wondering what these internal compartments looked like. Did they have windows of any kind? There is something vaguely windowish at the front of the "cigar" part on this image, but it isn't that good. Most pictures aren't. Zeppelin is a FA, but it really needs a good cross-section showing what the construction looked like inside. (To continue this rambling stream-of-consciousness reply with something completely unrelated, I have also been wondering in the last few days why there seem to be no easily available images on the web of Stig Wennerström from before the magic year of 1944. He was born in 1907 and an officer already in the late 1920s) u p p l a n d 10:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah, I had been thinking of Stig Wennerström! Stig Bergling also. But those guys pale next to the British and American spies — talk about colorful, there. Hmm, I'm pretty sure I've seen a cross-section of the Hindenburg, and that it did have an internal chamber.
 * August S., right. He was living in Paris at the time, and was interviewed by a French mag during the pre-expedition media furore. Asked what he thought of their chances, he replied very sensibly that a hot-air balloon like that of the Montgolfier brothers would have been safer, and that he was concerned about whether the drag-rope steering would work. The paper made fun of the modesty of the genius' notions: a plain old montgolfière, bah.
 * Hey, get a load of today's DN! I believe I already do justice to Martinsson, though, even though I haven't read his actual Strindberg biography (I did know it was in the works). Martinsson's dissertation and article were the only decent anglophone sources I had, so I made the most of them. Bishonen | börk börk börk 10:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC).


 * There is always Sven Hedin, if camels can be allowed to replace the balloons. Or some interesting old Swedish crime or scandal, such as Bishop Dick Helander and his letters, if they were in fact his, or the Murder of Gustav III of Sweden. Witchhunts in Sweden is another article waiting to be written. u p p l a n d 17:53, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There's always Linné's disciples too, those young guys who went off plant-collecting to the ends of the earth and died like flies from strange unfamiliar germs. And scandals are good, you've got the idea. "Murder" in an article name is almost on a par with "balloon" as a draw, I reckon. (Maybe that one should be "assassination", though?) I was thinking, daringly, of the Hajby affair. Gustav V being gay and a blackmail story and Vilhelm Moberg trying to make it public, or have I got it wrong? And some squalid stuff about the Court plotting to get Hajby (sp?) incarcerated without a trial. Though I doubt there's enough information available even now. The Helander thing may by contrast be of perfect proportion for an article, nice and self-limiting and pretty self-structuring. (Why don't you do it?) And there's the Sun and Spring guy. ;-) Raskenstam? Bishonen | börk börk börk 18:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC).


 * There are already articles on the Kejne affair and the Haijby affair (although both could certainly be expanded and better referenced). I posted a stubby article the other day on Fredrik von Sydow of von Sydow murders fame, but haven't read the books and can't do more than this at the moment. There is a recent crime case which has everything - sex, religion, murder - in one package: the Knutby murder in early 2004, which has already generated a few books, but may seem too tabloidy because of its recentness.


 * It would be nice to have a FA on Linnaeus for next year which is the 300th anniversary and will be celebrated in various ways in Sweden. There is certainly potential for a number of related articles on things such as his disciples (the ones who died gruesome deaths from strange parasites in exotic locations, but also on some survivors such as Carl Peter Thunberg and his stays in South Africa and Japan.) u p p l a n d 09:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I wonder if an The Three Faces of Eve and/or Sibyll could use the family tree template in an effort to explain how s/h/it can be three people or four and yet one user of Wikipedia. Geogre 11:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Might I steer you (with drag-rope steering, perhaps?) towards Strindberg as he really deserves a good article. Though sadly it doesn't involve any balloons...hey, check this out...that's Strindberg with a kind of a balloon...uhhhh thingy...balloon thingy! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * And, by the way, Colley Cibber is now the featured article on Portal:Theatre. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 17:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Amorrow
If that's the policy then you should also blank the earlier post Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Hijacked AfD which is probably also him. Thatcher131 11:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe it was blanked and then restored so as to allow investigation of the account. (And, indeed, he is an unwrite-on-sight user.)  Geogre 12:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Restored by Thatcher131, who wasn't aware that the "account" — the IP — is fully investigated. So what? Geogre, I'm not handling stuff very well, it looks like. Is 41 way scary? I realize that's mostly a practical matter — a question of where you are, and I was in a good place — but is it scary in and of itself? Bishonen | börk börk börk 14:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC).
 * 41 kind of stunk, but we're up to 44 as of day after tomorrow. I grow old, I grow old/ I shall wear my trousers rolled.  Geogre 15:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, gee. :-( Yes, I know you do. I was trying to be a bit mysterious so other people wouldn't get it. I should have e-mailed instead. Would you mind running the query past some higher brain centers before having that peach? Bishonen | börk börk börk 16:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC).
 * I cannot follow the elipse -- too eliptical for me -- so e-mail would be better. Geogre 19:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Tag happy
I'd love for other folks to look at Wise Blood and see if the mad taggers are right. However, I'm not awfully inclined to take umbrage or candy from a baby or that toy from that fool the speaker's mace. Just a new article to tell about: Thomas Whenstone. It seems that even democracies sometimes have nepotism as bad, nearly, as Giles Mompesson. Geogre 16:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Wise Blood
Why did you put a cleanup tag on Wise Blood? The article is very well written, as far as I can see. (It's mostly the work of User:Geogre, author of many Featured articles.) And a Cleanup template branded on its forehead is very disfiguring and shameful. I think you ought to put an explanation on the article's talk page when you add that tag — certainly when the reason for it is far from obvious, as here. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 19:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC).
 * That was a mistake, I thought I had taken it off after I added it, but I guess got messed up somehow. Thanks for pointing it out.--Cúchullain t/ c 20:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't mind, if someone thinks the article can be improved (not that one, anyway, but I was ticked when someone put Henry Carey (writer) on the list while I had been working on it for months), but I did sort of need to know why or how. Certainly I'm not above writing things that aren't up to snuff. I'm not immune, but the lack of input had me really frustrated. Geogre 23:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Love your Thomas Whenstone, some life! :-) As for the nepotism, the interesting thing is how differently it was regarded (for lots of good reasons, of course). People would have thought Cromwell was horribly immoral if he hadn't looked out for his nephew — it wasn't optional, it was what a decent person did. Things like that wouldn't have suddenly changed just because the world was turned upside down. Bishonen | talk 23:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC).

Well, he is like Mompesson, in that regard. It's always interesting to read plays where a king is criticized for giving too much to favorites (Edward II comes to mind), as picking unworthy favorites is a sign of bad character, and so is rewarding nephews in a particular way when they show their incompetence or unfitness. You have to look out for them, but you're supposed to show how clever you are by realizing that they'd be better off at the Admiralty Office than with guns under command, and you show yourself magnificent and wise beyond all the ages if you punish your bastard son, the Duke of Monmouth, after he does a little thing like organize a revolt against your brother. Geogre 02:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

"POV artists"
Oh the irony. The amazing part is that he actually sees himself as NPOV. Whether that's self delusion or dishonesty is a distinction without a difference. FeloniousMonk 21:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Bishonen, hang in there. Sam's diatribes were uncalled for and despicable.  In fact the comments should probably be added to the RfC (via diffs).  Take care,  Jim 62 sch  12:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * That's a thought. Thanks, guys. I don't want to comment or argue on this page, obviously, since I don't want to draw SS into responding here, but there's a certain logic in putting his comments on the RFC (they are comments on the RFC, after all). Bishonen | talk 12:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC).

They're kind of the heart of it, at least in my view, since what I see happening most is the identification of the words with the person and the totality of the person. I know that tends a bit toward the psychoanalytical rhetorical, but in effect that's both the cause and the mode of the problem: identifying the truth with the words, the words with the person, and therefore the jarring of words as the jarring of ideas and the warfare of people. (It's cold up here on the empyrean heights.) Geogre 14:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Scandinavian modes of transport
Swedish military bicycle - no balloon or steering ropes, nor indeed skis, but a "unique chain-operated front brake"! -- ALoan (Talk) 16:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Another image question and dancers from Commedia dell'arte
Ok, now that I understand the situation regarding the "ghost image" pages for images in Commons let me ask something else... Here's what I'm doing, I've created a commons account and I'm now organizing theatre images there. I would like to start adding eligible images to the commons. I've been looking around and have come across discussions on deleting images here on Wikipedia that have already been uploaded to commons. What is the current (if any) admin consensus regarding this? Thanks!
 * P.S. I've started researching Shakespeare's reputation and have already added a bit. See my responses on my talk page. More to come! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 20:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)