User talk:Ceoil/Archive 10

Request for arbitration
I have filed a request for arbitration where you are an involved party. Please see Requests for arbitration and add a statement if you wish. Jehochman Talk 17:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Zeraeph-SandyGeorgia
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Zeraeph-SandyGeorgia/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Zeraeph-SandyGeorgia/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 19:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

First discussion of the New Year
Happy New Year! Celebrate with Ian and Stipe. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually said "What the F**k" aloud. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You want to talk about hot? Emmylou Harris. Check out that picture of her from 1980. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Would you be able to upload a soundclip for a post-Berry R.E.M. song for the R.E.M. aricle? WesleyDodds (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I tried to see how far I could take "Nightswimming" with what I have available. Not that far, it turns out. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * A nice essay featuring it (reference it in the article, i dare you!). I love that song. Should have helped with [R.E.M.] somehow... Hi Ceoil! –Outriggr § 00:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently it was only released as a single in the UK, so we both got screwed. Well, I was ten at the time and barely knew anything about R.E.M., but the thought's the same. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to go to bed now, but here. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Someone who works for The Cure has been vandalizing my user page today. I feel loved. Anyhoo, what are ye up to? WesleyDodds (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Evidence presented by The Fat Man Who Never Came Back
Hi Ceoil, I don't think we're understanding one another. The ArbCom participants have cast doubt upon whether my evidence SandyGeorgia's history of helping problematic editors is pertinent to the case. One editor has accused me of "eulogizing" her or implying she can do no wrong. I'm entirely unsure what your problem with my comments is. Please clarify, if you care to.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 04:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

happy Mango season
  'TIS MANGO SEASON.... Have a shlice of mango cheek...well, I am up to my armpits in the things. Yuletide means lots and lots of mangos, as well as turkey and ham and ice-cream and pressies. Were on special so I bought 3 crates for AU$20 and now I have both crispers in the refrigerator full and even with everyone eating two of the ##$@& things every mealtime... I am a bit mangoed out so I thought I'd spread the goodwill around....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

If you ever think about cussing in a post again, remember Father Ted...oh feck... ;) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

George Moore FAR
I had been hoping you would have some time to assist in saving George Moore for deletion during its FAR. I saw that you were away for some time, then returned and the other day it seemed that you were departing Wikipedia forever, but now I see you are back, hopefully for a while. As I am not the literary type, it has been taking me considerable effort to add content to the article. The Frazier book is 650 pages and not very readable nor do I have that much time to absorb it. You seem more literary orientated than I, so do you think you will be able to do some work on this or shall we just let it lapse for now? Cheers TIA ww2censor (talk) 04:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I regret having to bother you with this matter again.
I apologise for bringing up the past, but I have offered this response to comments about my use of extremely offensive language toward you. You are, of course, welcome to respond, or ignore it, as you choose. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about missing your response. Well, I can see why people are pleased to note that they consider you a friend - you certainly are passionate about defending them! Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Las Meninas
Great to see that Las Meninas has now been promoted, Ceoil. A lovely article, which I am proud to have had some association with now.

Good to see you here. All the best!

–&thinsp; Noetica ♬♩&thinsp;Talk 23:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, thanks for getting me involved! Johnbod (talk) 23:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Same here. A nice way to start the Wiki New Year. Cheers, JNW (talk) 00:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've been keeping an eye on it. Johnbod (talk) 09:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

George Moore
Hey Ceoil. I noticed you noticed the closure. It's far and away the Longest FAR Ever. Good work, even if it's not totally perfect. You know, you might preemptively work on some of Filiocht's others. Marskell (talk) 09:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message, and yes I saw that it had been retained. I will reinsert the quote from Lady Gregory as it had been referenced in the subsequent sentence but I did not want to ref it twice but will add it back with its own ref. Otherwise I might try to do some work on it as time goes by. I saw a copy of the Frazier book quite cheap online. If I do some more work, may I call on you to review it again? Cheers. ww2censor (talk) 15:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Peer review please?
Hey Ceoil! I've just posted the article I Don't Remember at WP:PR. Since you're interested in music, I was wondering if you'd be interested in giving the article a looking over... maybe you'll see something we've missed? That'd be awesome! Thanks! -- rm 'w a vu  08:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Las Meninas work
Thanks for your note, Ceoil. Yes, that was a satisfying collaboration on a fine article. Glad you're back! I've been away from FAC for a little while, after a big stretch of work on Hamlet. Distracted by this project, now:  You might consider adding your voice to that push! Otherwise, I hope I see you around and that we will work together sometime.

–&thinsp; Noetica ♬♩&thinsp;Talk 09:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll be happy to lend a hand with those other articles. I can help best by polishing after others have finished the bulk of their work, and then by maintaining consistency, stylistic integrity, and the dotting of i&thinsp;s while others continue their tweaking. Let me know when I can be most effectively deployed in this way; I'll then make time to get involved as soon as I can.
 * –&thinsp; Noetica ♬♩&thinsp;Talk 10:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

oh, you're back!
Pleased you've returned, and delighted at that article. Fine work indeed. More please. Tony  (talk)  10:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I hope you're back!
It looks like you might be back and I really hope so, because Rupert Clayton and I are putting Boydell Shakespeare Gallery up for peer review and we could use some feedback from the artistically-inclined. :) Awadewit | talk  00:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Zeraeph
This arbitration has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The case was renamed upon closing from "Zeraeph-SandyGeorgia" to "Zeraeph". User:Zeraeph, including and socks and future accounts, is banned from Wikipedia for one year. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 14:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Tale of a Tub
Thank goodness that arb is done, to begin.

Do you have anything you might offer at Featured article review/A Tale of a Tub? I hate relying on you everytime Filiocht comes up, but I don't know what else to do. I can't hand out a blanket exemption to a non-active editor. Marskell (talk) 07:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * "It would be a very brave person that would step in to work on this FAR considering the bashing being doled out by the mob." -- Thank you for this comment, much appreciated. Cirt (talk) 10:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC).

Ophelia (painting): Use of citation templates
Hi, thanks for working on "Ophelia (painting)". I wonder, though, why you have removed all the citation templates such as cite book and cite web? I think they help to ensure a consistent citation format. Let's continue this conversation on the article's talk page. &mdash; Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 12:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Rrrrrrrrrrreem
Any R.E.M. song articles you want me to fix up? I'm kind of on a roll here with "Nightswimming" and "Losing My Religion". WesleyDodds (talk) 12:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Could you make one for Half a World Away and/or Me in Honey from Out of Time (album)? I, Ceoil, really like those two songs. Thanks! FakeCeoil 06:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, harbourcoat would be great if you can find sources. Funny, I don't remember typing the above, and I don't usually make such grand statments as "I, Ceoil...". FakeCeoil (talk) 03:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You listen to Goldfrapp? WesleyDodds (talk) 03:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I look at her a lot more than I listen to her. But she is great sunday morning music in fairness. Ceoil (talk) 03:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Man, people are stupid. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * U2 was promoted to FA status in four days, before I had a chance to leave comments at the FAC. Hell, has any FAC been promoted in four days? Is it worth discussing with Raul? I mean, I am kinda bemused that R.E.M. is still at FAC, but still . ..
 * Ugh. Did you have to say that where I'd see it?  Now I'm going to have to go fix it, and nominators always resist when the article was passed.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It tickles me that Ceoil's talk page is now a public forum. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm mainly concerned because I saw some unformatted refs in there and some of the sections still read like bulletpoints of information. On a related note, how close do you live to Bono? WesleyDodds (talk) 11:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No Sandy, I can look after this one with Wesely. Its cosmetic only, not likely to be resisted. Ceoil (talk) 00:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Nasty amount of work needed there; well, I did the last section. If you don't mind doing it, I fought with an aviation article all day, so I'll leave it.  Smiles, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, This is why I like to stay away from the Wiki bureaucracy and instead try to focus on writing and referencing articles. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, and YouTube, I guess. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I honestly have never heard of this England place. Care to tell me more? From what I understand, the album Mad Bob did when a member of the Banshees was just all right. His album with Steve Severin as The Glove is interesting. They recorded it during a two-week bender, if I remember correctly. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The Glove album was released on clear blue vinyl, by the way. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I like British Sea Power, but there were times on Open Season they sounded too much like Psychedelic Furs, of all people. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * A thought: do you think we could rangle Outriggr into collaborating on an R.E.M. article with us? I have the sources, he has the copyediting ability, and you have acid house soundtrack to keep everyone going . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 12:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

FakeCeoil? Huh. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is clear that Ceoil has gone off the deep end [/hides talk page]. Do you have an REM article in mind? –Outriggr § 06:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Albums are generally the easiest music FA projects since they're so specific and reviews are easy to find. Murmur, Reckoning, Document, Green, Automatic for the People, and Monster would be fine by me, although Murmur is not an album I like to listen to repeatedly on end, and all I've heard of the last three albums are the singles. "Radio Free Europe", "Losing My Religion", and "Everybody Hurts" could be FAs ("Losing My Religion" just got to GA status like an hour ago). A band member article could work; it looks like Michael Stipe will be this week's WikiProject Alternative Music Collaboration of the Week. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I do kind of like "Rise". But it sure ain't no "Death Disco".WesleyDodds (talk) 23:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Notice how the new talk page message has moved on the page? It confuses me. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I haven't heard too much Guided By Voices (I remember listening to "I Am a Scientist" years ago), but we got in the new Robert Pollard records and it sucked sooo bad. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * First order of business is to hide his Morrissey records. He seems to be the moody sort right now. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I think Outriggr just called Ceoil a lard-arse. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 04:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I've been trying to broaden my Wiki knowledge (that is, read articles for fun and not because I'm working on them) in the last few days, and so I've been reading a number of animal articles. This scares me. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's just me, but I feel the sheer length of Kid A and In Rainbows )the two-longest album pages in the alt-rock WikiProject) says something about your average Radiohead fan, particulary in regard to the later albums. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Tackling In Utero and Definitely Maybe with good ol' Brandt Luke Zorn, since I have the references. I also proposed this. I also feel like I should be more active at FAC. Metallica came along nicely enough, and something like Vampire had enough feedback and supports without me, but I don't want stuff like Alice in Chains getting through in the state it is in. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's a bit of fun I found while browsing around: Requests for arbitration/The Troubles WesleyDodds (talk) 12:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Bold merge them into one article. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Pardon me. I was just entertaining the thought of the FAC ("Ok, I see the tryptich is dealing with the Crucifixtion, but how do the mentions of fat girls and "meat-eating vulgarians" figure into this? Additional citations would make this clearer . . .") WesleyDodds (talk) 12:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I should sleep now. I was planning to do more work on Michael Stipe today. Ah well, that'll have to wait for tomorrow. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. Your tomorrow is my later tonight. Ceoil (talk) 13:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I dare you. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm listening to an awful lot of Queen right now. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

S Club peer review
Hello there. Your name is listed under "peer review volunteers", so I presume you're okay to approach, randomly. The S Club article has recently been nominated for peer review, and I was wondering whether you could be so kind as to check it out and leave your comments? It falls under "music since 1976" so I thought you would be suitable! :) Thanks very much for any comments you leave, or indeed even if you just read this and think "Get lost, S Club suck~*". - ǀ Mikay ǀ  12:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Preview button?
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Guliolopez (talk) 10:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * oh, my. No good deed goes unpunished? Sandy Georgia (Talk) 02:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Abbey Theatre
Hi Ceoil. In the face of WikiProject Geographical coordinates, and the general practice of including infoboxes to cover a summary of subject information (in this case theatre capacity, location, architect, open date, etc) can you explain why you removed both? (Citing the first as "silly"?) Guliolopez (talk) 11:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Your magnificent fist
Thank you! It landed in the perfect spot. We really do need some means of recognizing FAR contributions. Or perhaps we should accept our basement-dwelling status?

Speaking of magnificent fists, who beats Ezra in terms of knocking you over? I don't know how to apply him to the site. Perhaps:


 * The apparition of these sigs on the page;
 * Petals on a wet black GFDL.

Ha! Not terribly creative. Marskell (talk) 19:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Venus
No, I'm not sure if I've even seen one - the museum may well not have allowed press photos. By a further odd coincidence I got the Dawson Carr (ed) NG/Yale book today (now greatly reduced) & I think some bits of Las M need either more rewording, or turning into quotes - nothing major. Johnbod (talk) 20:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

ATT
The Stout reference is interesting, because he's just in the first wave of fighting with Ehrenpreis. The reference to Quintana is pretty unnecessary. This is something that's in every biography. It's from Journal to Stella. It's from Correspondence. It's from Spence's Anecdotes. It's from Gulliver's Travels, book I (Gulliver urinating on the queen's palace to put out the fire: the "Key" to GT tells us that that's a reference to Tale, and Gulliver is "rewarded" by having to stay far away from the Queen). In other words, it's everywhere, which is why it's kind of common knowledge. It doesn't hurt to cite, but it doesn't really need a citation. On the other hand, the article makes too big a deal, probably, about the persona debate. Ehrenpreis influenced a generation of scholars to see things his way, but you won't find one classroom in ten any more that still does it. Nearly everyone teaches some form of "the hack" or "the modern" or "the narrator" as a singular presence.

Adams is another where it simply isn't really necessary. That was practically the last time anyone brought up the authorship question, and it had only ever been present as a sign of the prejudice of the critic. Finally, the identification of the Whigs and the new men.... ! Yes, it could be to that anthology, or another, or another, or another, or another....  The point is that these things really reduce us to the level of gibbering. If we have to cite common knowledge, we don't look more reliable: we look less reliable. We stop looking like professionals and start looking like nervous freshmen. The problem is that nervous freshmen don't address the Tale, and readers who need those notes probably...well...I can't imagine who does need them, honestly.

I appreciate the effort, but it's just so strained to have to put up a footnote to an anthology. Geogre (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I want to make it clear that I really appreciate the effort. The last thing I want to do is bite.  It's just that it is a fascinating world, and Tale is the most formidable of the satires.  A recent informal poll on C18-L, the listserver for 18th century British literature professors, showed that most professors had dropped teaching it because "it's too hard."  Me, I think it's great stuff and not too hard at all, but it is one of those works where there are worlds upon worlds inside it.
 * The thing about authorship is interesting, for example. Swift cleared it up in his own lifetime.  However, the "debate" got revived every so often, and always by someone who hated Swift.  I don't mean that they did it as a way to discredit Swift, but take, for example, Johnson.  Johnson loved the Tale, but he knew that he didn't like Swift, so he wanted it to have been written by someone else.  The same is true, but even more so, in the 19th century, when Swift is "known" as insane and a "misanthropist."  Critics like the Tale and they don't want to admit that it was written by this guy they have concluded fits in the "misanthropist" hole, and so they give more credence to that single silly letter Thomas Swift wrote.  There are irregularities about the publication, but there's just no way it's by anyone else.  It's easier to explain the alternative printer than to explain how anyone else wrote it.
 * The only unified debate was the "persona" debate. There have been loads of little debates about this or that, but that's the last one that was a unified debate (like the "Is Gulliver insane" debate with GT).  For myself, I think it's a slam dunk that there is a single narrator, but I tried to be honest and leave room throughout for either camp.  Geogre (talk) 21:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Abbey Theatre
Unless my eyes aren't working, this isn't actually at FAR, yes? If you're doing preemption, excellent! (GWB coined the term, but I had to look up its spelling.) We could have a structure where you work it over beforehand and then present it at FAR for a quick look-over. Marskell (talk) 21:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Irish Geography
Replied here. I reply where the discussion starts. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 20:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I thank you, Velázquez thanks you...
for all your good work, not only by way of your individual contributions, but in bringing together other editors to help on Las Meninas. I have not yet contributed to the Rokeby--it appeared pretty strong a few weeks ago, but having heard from you encourages me to stroll over there sometime soon. By the way, in years past I was a ridiculously ardent fan of REM and Nirvana (nowadays I can boast that I personally know, a really good blues singer and band), but have nothing in my library on popular music with which to contribute, so I stay away from the subject. Best regards, JNW (talk) 21:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
Wow - thanks - and such a pretty one! Johnbod (talk) 21:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar 2 + plus lecture
Now listen here, fellow: I'm no fan of barnstars. *Screws up his face into a pirate scowl: "the men on deck don't need no damn barnstars!"*

Ha! Yes, they do.

I'm going to give you the original barnstar, because it's the most original I can give. (Have I already given you one?—well then, I'm drunk.)

Rokeby
Have you seen p99 of the "Dawson Carr" ? Johnbod (talk) 00:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed - worth quoting fairly fully I think! Johnbod (talk) 00:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeats
I know that, but don't let on ;) One Night In Hackney  303  19:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You can see my previous thoughts on the matter here. One Night In Hackney  303  19:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Y'know, to be frank, I don't give a toss what you think. If you revert the article again, I will change it back.  Please cease leaving messages on my talk page.  I have no intention of discussing this matter with you any further. --- RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  19:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * As I said before: WTF. Why are you like you are. Ceoil (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Warning regarding your edit to User talk:RepublicanJacobite.
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive'  20:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Specifically referencing another editor as a "prick", as you did on the Administrators Notice Board, is a rather obvious violation of WP:NPA, irrelevant if the editor you were reporting was in the wrong, or not. Please refrain from the use of such personal attacks. If you feel the need to express yourself in a strong manner, please find a way to do so that does not resort to name calling. Best of luck and please find! LonelyBeacon (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)