User talk:Giano/archive 20

Uniformed opinion?
Just letting you know.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Wehwalt; that's most kind of you to bring this to my attention. At one time I thought it was the American editors who seemed a little odd and over moralistic (is that a word?), but they seem to be being rapidly overtaken by the Canadians - I put it down to too much snow and a lack of a comprehensive alcohol supply. Giano    (talk) 21:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. This is, I suspect, another area in which having Jimbo advocate will harden positions on the other side, especially after the little adventure he went on with the terms of use. .  We are here to build an encyclopedia, not sing Kumbaya, and this is a shop floor.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Fake Prussian nobility? Not quite a Junker, but...
Morning Giano, hope you're well. Years ago, you served my father in the Clone Wars helped me with some fake Italian nobility, who seem to pop up with alarming frequency.

I thought perhaps you might be better than I at fact-checking nobility of nations other than Italy.

On my talk page this morning, I've received a request for help regarding a Prussian nobleman who has been deleted from http://de.wikipedia.org/ but still has an article on this English Wikipedia. The request for help wants him deleted here too, but I'm being cautious.

The discussion on my talk page is here, and the German deletion is apparently at Martin von Zoransky, and the still-existing enwiki article is Herzog Martin V. Zoransky.

Before I just go right ahead and AfD it on the grounds that "it's been found a fake elsewhere", do you have any insights into whether there might be a shred of legitimacy here?

Thanks! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * In my small and limited knowledge of these matters; genuine nobles are always well documented and related to other equally well documented genuine nobles. As a rule of thumb: "If there's doubt kick them out." Giano    (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Now seems to be at Articles for deletion/Herzog Martin V. Zoransky. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

G'day Giano
I've got something perking and would like to hear your views off-wiki, away from prying eyes. I'd appreciate it very much if you'd drop me an email at your convenience as several people have steered me your way. ShoeHutch@gmail.com Best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 22:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Carrite. My Wikipedia email is working fine, please use it. Giano    (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * PS: Anyone who can stomach reading "Carrite this is an extremely unfair and false representation of the situation that does nothing to bring light and love and healing and progress......... " and not be vomiting uncontrollably has my undying admiration - this American sentimental rubbish/jargon has to be stopped before we all become incurably infected. Giano    (talk) 20:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

"WARNING TO ALL": The selfie files
Dear(est)Giano, I couldn't agree with you more about the "warning to all" vis-à-vis potential attacks and discord in re: uploading photos.

For my part, I was just ambling down the grassy-and-foilage-way, when I came upon this abandoned camera, and began taking shots of myself, and my mates ((1)Travel selfie pictures: celebrities, animals and more, Telegraph, 6 August 2014 . I got a few "killer-head-shots" in when the alleged-camera-owner returned, and commenced with assiduous imploring (of) me to give his camera-back (2)"Me and my primates: David Slater and a macaque hold hands for the photographer's own selfie",  Daily Mail, 6 August 2014). All this was well-and-fine, and now, I find that there's "a whole lot of voting going on", on some Wikipedia-related website, about the photo *I* took, and a lot of hoo-ha about who owns it.

Allow me to clarify. *I* took the photo, but as I understand it, a bunch of sodding Americans (whatever the hell *those* might be) have decided that *I* have no rights, as a primate. Even worse, a bunch of sodding Wikipedians (whatever the hell *those* might be) held a non-binding public vote, to ensure that the photo that *I* took, goes into the public domain (whatever the hell *that* might be). Beyond this, as fate would have it, even if I had access to a computer, such that I might have participated in a vote which holds vast implications for my fundamental rights (assuming that monkeys have rights, also, assuming I understand what the hell all the fuss is about), I've been informed that UK government-funded university studies have published claims that I wouldn't know what to do-with the computer, even if I had access to one, in the Indonesian jungle, all the aforementioned (even-more-frustratingly) effectively rendering inputs on my part, moot ((3)"Give six monkeys a computer, and what do you get? Certainly not the Bard", The Guardian, Friday 9 May 2003 Quote: "The monkeys aren't reducible to a random process. They get bored and they shit on the keyboard rather than type." ).

As if this weren't sufficiently distressing, now this English-dude photographer-fellow is running around claiming he lost 10,000 quid by virtue of this debacle - effectively on my account.

What a circus these humans make. Signed, MacacaSelfie (talk) 12:47, 10 August 2014 (UTC) ps: I love you.
 * Dear MacsaSelfie, Funnily enough, I missed this all happening live, and only heard of for the first time yesterday morning while looking at the Times, whilst having my poached egg. Fascinating article most concerned with diverse subjects as Jimbo on parenting, internet filth and the odd mention of a monkey. I can see that this must be tres difficult for you, but you must gain some consolation from being such a good looking macaque. However, your fine dental work suggests to me that you may be an American yourself. No self-respecting European would dare to display such a perfect smile. To solve your problem, I suggest you run for Adminship, you are far better looking than many of our admins and clearly far brighter too. That way you can delete the image yourelf, and also ban any other minor irritants voting against you. Giano    (talk) 14:40, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Domus G.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Domus G.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. 81.193.208.149 (talk) 20:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I make a point of not responding to anons, but in your case this is ridiculous trolling. Giano    (talk) 10:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Blenheim Palace
I watch the Blenheim Palace article because I have an interest in the subject. I don't know you or User:GoodDay, I don't know the history between you, I don't intend to look it up, and I couldn't care less what size the picture of the Palace is in that article. But as a disinterested outsider I think your possessive attitude to the article has on at least two occasions crossed the line. Your talk of "principal editor" on GoodDay's talk page smacks of WP:OWN. Referring to other editors as "idiots" and their edits as "trolling", "pretentious" and "ridiculous" is not WP:CIVIL. Dave.Dunford (talk) 22:32, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, if you can't be bothered to check the history or anything pertaining to the subject you appear so desperate to comment on, perhaps I could invite you to at least cast a glance at the essay What is a troll? Does anything there look familiar to you? --RexxS (talk) 23:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Rex. I'm always bemused when people describe themselves as "disinterested" while proving that they are interested. I would love to have studied psychology - I've always felt I would be quite good at it. Giano    (talk) 07:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well what a surprise, a dismissive response, and a sneer at my character and motives as a side dish. I'm not "desperate" to comment on anything (I've noted what I consider overly officious behaviour on Blenheim Palace in the past, and done nothing) and, actually, I have checked the history of the Blenheim Palace article, which is the only thing I care about here. Ironic how you call for "less bull more writing" but Rexxs seems to be suggesting I should stop trying to improve articles and instead spend my Wiki time revisiting some spat between two other editors. Still, you carry on – it'll be without my help on this article from now on though (and if you look at my edits I hope you'll agree they've always been constructive). God forbid you should actually consider your behaviour and the way it comes across to an outsider. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Still interested then? Rex has suggested nothing of the sort regarding your improvement of articles. Now go away and stop putting false words into people's mouths and making a nuisance of yourself. In my experience, GoodDay is able to do that quite well enough for himself without needing extra help from you. Giano    (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe I misunderstood the point RexxS was making, but he appeared to be calling me a troll; and your response is "Go away...and stop making a nuisance of yourself." Very civil, I'm sure. Don't worry, I'm out of here. The impression of you I've got from your behaviour in articles we both edit has been confirmed by this encounter. Bye. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Good! My impression is that you are a fantasist with a persecution complex. You've turned up here uninvited and gone on to imagine things that Rex is saying, and I am still looking for the origin of your "desperate" quote. No one has accused you of being "desperate" to comment on anything - something else you've clearly imagined. I sincerely hope your article writing has a little more substance and fact about it.  Giano    (talk) 18:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI
FYI:. CC.
 * Sorry, I know nothing about you or the problems you've been having. I doubt anything that I say could make any difference - probably makes things worse. Good luck. Giano    (talk) 09:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Colton Cosmic
 * AN discussion
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Colton Cosmic/Archive


 * "...Additionally, as I said to Colton, I could find no reason for him not to disclose the account to ArbCom. Per his wishes and my promise, I have not done so and do not intend to do so, but I continue to offer my advice that disclosing the account to ArbCom, explaining the reason to them why he has privacy concerns (the account is not a definitive real name), will be a helpful way forward. As it stands, I neither endorse nor impose a continuation of the ban. I don't know anything about the rest of the evidence or controversy, as I restricted my research to the specific question of whether the alleged past account was under any sanctions: it was not.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2014 (UTC)."

In my view, any one who tells the Arbcom their personal details is dicing with their real life privacy - so I can understand why User: Colton Cosmic would not choose to do so. There is also a matter of precedent - I know of other editors here, who have new accounts and clean slates and they were extremely troublesome in their previous lives here, yet they are completely protected. Presumably, they have disclosed their details, so have the threat of RL exposure hanging over them if they don't behave. Looks like you have a choice Colton - out yourself or go away. Giano   (talk) 10:01, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

At a glance: this comment seems pertinent and ably sums up your predicament:


 * "Comment. Blocking Colton for nothing in the first place was pretty disruptive. We reap what we sow, sometimes. (I learned recently that the Greg Kohs troubles all began with a bad block, badly, arrogantly handled, like this one.) But if you want back into the clubhouse, Colton, follow the roolz. It's the nature of things here - and most places, really. I'm not exactly sure what you did at Wikipediocracy. Did you claim to be compiling a dossier on the private details of all the arbitrators, and threaten to use those details in order to punish or coerce them? That's the story being put about. You'll need to deal with those accusations, I expect, in any ban appeal. If those claims are true, and you demonstrate sincere regret, I'll support you, and I'm sure more than a few here will ... but you'd need to show you know you were being a total dick and regret it. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 02:22, 24 July 2014 (UTC)"

In my experience, User: Anthonyhcole is generally pretty clued up, so think I'll leave it here, and if anyone reading this wants to help you out, they can do so. As I said above, I doubt there's much I can say or do, beyond cause your detractors to all scream that I'm seeking drama. Giano   (talk) 10:15, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Out myself? To the group responsible for The Anvil Email ? It's extortion and totally contravenes Wikipedia policy like WP:CLEANSTART. My prior account was untroublesome, five or six years nearly all content editing, no encounters at drama boards and I don't think I even knew what Arbcom was. It wouldn't work anyhow. When Jimbo states the prior account had no blocks, bans, sanctions, even warnings etc. the usual suspects switch their "ban him" arguments to "it was never about the prior account, it's his block evasion." CC. PS: Well, I could use your support at the discussion but it seems I won't have it. presumably not signed by Colton Cosmic.


 * He is usually pretty clued up so I was surprised to see him weasel wording "that's the story being put about" and setting exacting terms for what I must do to satisfy him on the rumors he's heard "if those claims are true." CC. presumably not signed by Colton Cosmic.
 * Well? Is the story that was "put about" true or is it not? Only you know the anser to that. Giano    (talk) 10:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Not "yes," not "no," and not "maybe." I will speak only on my actions on Wikipedia, and reject any authority of administrators to extend their "investigation" of me off-wiki. The Anvil Email shows where that leads. I'd ask you as well to confine yourself to evaluation of my conduct on Wikipedia. I am blocked for socking, never did it. presumably not signed by Colton Cosmic.
 * Socking or not: it sounds to me as though you're in deep shit. Remember you came here of your own choice! I know nothing of you, but I've given you a fair bit of free publicity here to restate your case - probably against the rules too. However, my advice to you is that most people (me included) are cynical about evasive people. In my experience, some people will lie even after it's obvious to everyone that they are lying; you should bear that in mind and start answering some questions honestly and in a straight forward manner. If you've made worrying off-wiki threats, you must have wanted people to believe them - or else why make them in the first place. It seems to me that you can either explain yourself or remain blocked. Simple choice because rightly or wrongly people won't support you if you're reputation is in the gutter. Giano    (talk) 11:08, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I believe I am straightforward and forthright. Straightforwardly and forthrightly, I will not discuss my activities or identity off-wiki. Oh I don't know about the value of any "publicity" at your talkpage but I enjoy the opportunity to debate my situation with you, and still entertain hope you'll come around and speak on my behalf. Yes, rumor-mongering and suspicion-mongering can ruin reputations. Throughout my case, from the beginning suspicion-mongering has been rampant. You'd be amazed to hear some of the theories. Silktork had me as the sock of some mystifying Mr. X figure he refused to identify, though he was forced to correct three or of the factual errors he had used to make up his hypothesis, and then turned to idle and pedantic insult. Anyhow I personally try not to succumb to rumor-mongering when appraising a person, preferring to look at evidence. CC. PS: Oh, I forgot to say that no, you are not behaving against the rules to talk to a block-evading editor, neither do you have any obligation to run around deleting block evaders, though policy does allow that, if it is what you want to do. presumably not signed by [[User:Colton Cosmic|Colton
 * For the benefit of any poor soul trying to follow this conversation, it has now come to an abrupt halt:
 * 13:03, 27 September 2014 Ymblanter changed block settings for 67.79.80.126 (talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 2 weeks (Block evasion: clearly needs a longer block given the past record)
 * There's probably more to this case than meets the eye, but generally I disprove of editors not being allowed to plead their own case, when there's been nothing officially and conclusively proved against them. Giano    (talk) 15:07, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
ww2censor (talk) 10:56, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

English country houses
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:18th_century_mansion_built_of_Bath_stone,_with_Italianate_alterations.JPG Hi - the picture on this link, of the 18th century mansion of Bath stone, just wondering where specifically it is located. Many thanks, Anna.

Meetup?
Hi. I'll be in the UK from the morning of Sunday 19th October to the afternoon of Saturday 25th. I'd very much like to shake your hand, if that could be arranged. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 01:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That would be nice, but sadly I won't be in the UK at that time. Giano    (talk) 07:36, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That is a shame. Maybe next time. Or, if you're ever in Australia... --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs ·

email) 05:12, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

St James's Palace
I've done some reworking of the St James's Palace article, as it was severely below par for such an important UK building. Given that you're something of an authority over at Buckingham Palace, I'd appreciate it if you could have a quick look over it and maybe give me an idea of where you think we should go with it next? Thanks in advance. Sotakeit (talk) 14:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Goodness me! That's certainly an important one that slipped through the net. I just had a look at it before you started and it was in v poor condition. You really need to expand the sections that you've wisely started. and then perhaps write an interior sections - as the interiors are today. I've been to a couple or receptions there and they are very spectacular in a tasteful, subdued kind of way - they are very red, I seem to remember. I wonder if there are any public domain images available. It's used for corporate entertainment (Oh yes, it can be hired by the right people) and entertaining by the minor Royals - so it's uses today can be expanded. I wonder if it's open to the public. I'll have a scout about and wee what i can find. I have one book with a section on it, but it's probably twenty years old, so won't be very good for a modern section. Giano    (talk) 17:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Quick question
I noticed you changed "Lady Watson" to plain Bessie; the Somerfield biography also daubs her Lady Watson though? Unfortunately, it doesn't give any other details about Flo's "Mummy" except that she came from Workington in Cumberland - do you think it should be changed back or left as is? I don't know enough about these sort of things! Apparently the family money was made from "Maypole Diaries" but it's obviously not the Maypole Dairy Products we have an article on. SagaciousPhil  -  Chat  10:25, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem SagPhil; unless Bessie was the daughter of an earl, marquess or duke (which is unlikely), she has be either Lady Watson or plain Bessie Watson. I changed it to simple Bessie because that told us her Christian name, simply calling her Lady Watson would not have done. As the wife of a baronet, it is already obvious that she was Lady Watson, but saying Lady Bessie Watson wrongly promotes her rank. That was my reasoning. Giano    (talk) 17:48, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

You were mentioned
You were mentioned here  regarding the hasty block on Ihardlythinkso. KoshVorlon  Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti 20:08, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification; while I feel very sorry for Ihardlythinkso - I really prefer not to interact with some of those already opining. There comes a time when one just feels it's time to leave the encyclopedia to the whims, caprices and daft ideas of the civility warriors and those looking for perceived sleights. Giano    (talk) 21:30, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rationalobserver (talk) 21:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
 * What a dreadfully ill-fitting name you've chosen for yourself. Giano    (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm getting too old and tired to deal with people like the above. Editors inclined to use cheap, out of context, edit summaries like this because they are losing a debate, which they started, are beneath contempt. Therefore, in future, those coming here with half baked complaints, trying to push their own agendas will be reverted on sight. For the record (and I don't intend to repeat myself) I am not anti-feminist and never have been. I'm in no way an misogynistic and have full and happy relationships in private, at work ad here with many women. I shall continue to treat male and female editors in the same way regardless of race, religion or sexuality. Giano    (talk) 08:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It is so cute when a "new" editor like Rationalobserver takes time out of their exemplary article work to "protect the wiki" from the vile forces of the dark lords!!!--MONGO 11:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly. Especially, when they are not only "new", but have very important people complementing them and posting on their talk pages . Giano    (talk) 12:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow! A note of kindness from the ruler of the known universe! Worth cherishing for ever and ever. That is proof that MONGO is but a pawn in the game of life for I have never had such a pleasure bestowed upon me.--MONGO 14:00, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Me neither! But I'm reforming my ways so he'll pop up here real soon. I can see that Wikipedia is fast becoming a site that a decent God fearing man can't permit his womenfolk to look at, let alone edit - until the day that Evil Eric is horsewhipped out of the community. Mr Wales deserves a big thank you for providing us with those diffs proving that the evil one is the Devil incarnate. Giano    (talk) 16:54, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Chin up, Giano. We are spatting on two articles, but I know you are one of the good eggs. (though, as "womenfolk," I shall look at anything I damn well please, thank you very much!) And...do I smell a sock over there, as well as a user name that is NOT truth in advertising? Montanabw (talk) 00:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a pity that one two others seem to be suffering from some form of identity crisis, which they feel the rest of us are too stupid to spot. In the great scheme of things infoboxes are neither here nor there; it's content that really matters and you do that too. It's been v rewarding to see those pages built by what is a Wikipedia dream team in so short a time. With that in mind, I've found the third and final member of Florence Nagle's gang, Louie Dingwall ((google: Horsewoman: the Extraordinary Mrs D: a Biography of Louie Dingwall, Dorset's Racehorse Trainer).  Giano    (talk) 07:17, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There's a nice quote, Nagle was reported to have said, "Mrs [Louie] Dingwall, Miss Wilmot and I were the ones pushing hardest against the ban. Yet a steward told me they couldn't risk our falling into the hands of bad men. We were all over 70 at the time." in this article linking all three women. There's not enough article to put it in yet. J3Mrs (talk) 08:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Brilliant, I found that quote last week and was going to add it to Flo's page, but then forgot about it before I had chance to edit. It woudl be nice to have another collaboration and see if we could get it up to at least the standard of the other two pages. This woman sound more intresting than the other two - she had an illegitimate baby and sued the father for maintenance (at a time when such things were supposedly not spoken of) and she wasn't born with a silver spoon in her mouth - so must have worked her way up from the ranks at time when that was quite hard. I think there's the makings of a good page here. Giano    (talk) 08:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you've noticed the suggestion re: the DYKs for Florence and Norah be combined into one? has kindly pulled the one for Norah back from prep meantime so it could be possible, if you agree? SagaciousPhil  -  Chat  13:47, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Not something we can use in Florence's article but when I was trying to find a first name for her friend Miss Newton Deakin, I stumbled across this little snippet about Miss Newton Deakin's Rolls Royce. Of course I do have one myself to use purely as a little country run around ...  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  12:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

An anthem to be sung as I recite the Administrator's pledge redux
Giano, il miglior fabbro, I have been inspired by your poetic works at WP:JIMBOTALK to suggest a possible national anthem of Wikipedia. I have only got as far as a first verse. To my understanding, you are related to a member of the British aristocracy. I am but a humble descendant of illiterate immigrants from the poorest parts of England, Ireland, and Germany who heard that Australia was entirely populated by convicts. On disembarking from the ships to the gold rush, they made their way to the nearest HM Prison, only to find that they actually had to be convicted of a crime to get a cot and three meals a day. They were poor and stupid, but honest. But mostly just poor and stupid. But I digress...

What first verse sounds best? --Shirt58 (talk) 13:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

To the Tune of "God Save the Queen" (and "My Country 'tis of Thee" for those on the other side of the Atlantic)

God save our gracious Jim

Long live our noble Jim

God save the Jim

Boss of Wikipedia

And Wikimedia

President por vida

God save the Jim

God save our gracious Jim

Long live our noble Jim

God save the Jim

Giano and Eric, these

Toxic personalities

Stay off his talk-page please

God save the Jim

God save our gracious Jim

Long live our noble Jim

God save the Jim

Retract their legal threats

Turn off their internets

Arbcom will ban them next

God save the Jim


 * Very clever, but I prefer something altogether more egalitarian - (to the tune of Marseillaise).

Arise, editors of the Wikpedia

The day of glory has arrived!

Against us tyranny

Raises its bloody banner (repeat)

Do you hear, in the countryside

The roar of Giano and his mates?

They're coming to all the bad pages

To fix all the dreadful mistakes Giano (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)


 * It's just to use an English version first: all satirical pastiches must be written in the original language before being translated into English as per Wikipedia:Pour les lulz épiques et grande justice.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind me saying so, Shirt58, I think my anthem has slightly more poetic merit than yours and is better suited to the current mood of the encyclopedia - a little violence and bloodshed can be very therapeutic. Giano    (talk) 16:34, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Your circumnavigation
Hi Giano; Is there a reason why during your circumnavigation of British Architecture during the summer you did not take up the case of Inigo Jones? FelixRosch (talk) 21:15, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I spend my life circumnavigating architecture. Over the years here, I'v probably written quite a bit about Inigo Jones, but not on his page it seems. I've mostly explaining why he could not have designed certain buildings which have been over optimistically attributed to him - rather than extolling him for introducing Palladianism to Britain. Interestingly, I did visit this Summer visit the Banqueting House; it was a belated visit; belated because I wrote our page on it here some years ago. Giano    (talk) 08:10, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Clarification motion
A case (The Troubles) in which you were involved has been modified by which changed the wording  of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee -- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * ...and what a festival of socks that turned out to be. Giano    (talk) 22:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Florence Nagle
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Norah Wilmot
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:05, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

A thought for New Year
Hello Giano; Moving to here from @Transporter Talk page. My calendar seems to show my having some free time during the next few weeks, and what do you think about possibly making a gift of a new peer review page for Wikipedia for the New Year. After the New Year my calendar will not have so much free time. Any thoughts about a favorite topic or theme in architecture? FelixRosch  ( TALK ) 21:29, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Felix, as my recent contributions show, I'm afraid that I have next to no time over the next few weeks, a few days over Christmas perhaps, bur that's about it. There are, however, a few pages crying out for improvement. Those that think the encyclopedia is complete and only needs a skeleton staff of civility admins to maintain it are talking rubbish. I assume you are thinking of British architecture - well there is Knole House (I've ever heard it called "house" before); there's also Ightham Mote - both are wonderful buildings, and should not be too hard to reference and improve drastically. I'd be happy to keep an eye on improvement and chip in if required, but i just don't have the time to really research or do the plans which I love drawing. Should you want a few Italian castles of villas, please ask, I have a long list of same wonderful nes with barely a mention here. Giano    (talk) 18:19, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello Giano; That was an interesting list. It would be very interesting to see what you had in mind for a "few Italian castles" or villas or basilicas, especially if you think they might be within possible striking distance of a peer-reviewed article with some effort. Cheers. FelixRosch   ( TALK ) 21:29, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Well I've written a couple that could be bought to GA standard with a little more work: Villa Medici at Cafaggiolo and Villa del Poggio Imperiale. There are a few in Sicily which are probably still stubs uness had anyone has vastly expanded them: Palazzo Beneventano del Bosco (you'll have to be careful of others with the same name), there's this one Palazzo Valguarnera-Gangi, where Il Gattopardo was filmed; this one, Villa Palagonia, may be too difficult. Once, years ago on a vacation, I visited this one, Palau Salort, in Menorca, which I always thought woudl be interesting to know more about. It's open to the public, but only gives the barest information on a printed handout, there doesn't seem a lot more on the internet either. So perhaps not.  Giano    (talk) 10:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello Giano; Both of the villa you mention above (Cafaggiolo or Poggio) are exceptional and either one in attractive to be upgraded to GA. I imagine its your choice of either an austere neoclassicism, or, a deliberate retrospective quattrocento Renaissance style. It would be useful if you could provide or could identify a priority list of which items you feel need to be developed in the villa which you prefer at this time. As I mentioned, I have several somewhat free weeks before the New Year and your priority list may be as long as needed. Before the New Year it should be ready for your close review and periodic review if this sounds interesting. Cheers. FelixRosch   ( TALK ) 15:33, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't mind which. If you can't read Italian, you'll probably find Villa del Poggio Imperiale easier to research. I think you'll find web-based information on Villa Medici at Cafaggiolo too limited, unless you have a decent public library nearby. I think if Poggio Imperiale had a proper interior section, it woudl be almost there. It looks as though I used proper books to write it rather then websites, so you may have to shout me for some further cites - GA people tend to be rather fanaical about them. I expect there's also a great deal on the internet. There may be some stuff on Commons since I wrote it - it was quite a long tine ago. Giano    (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Giano; If the Poggio Imperiale interior section means the interior architecture then there is a somewhat famous floor plan by Giuseppe Ruggieri which may be worth trying to download in some way for its usefulness. If your intention was also to include a discussion of the interior decoration, interior art work, statues, tapestry, etc, then let me know how extensive it should be for completeness at peer review. This is my list of my available cites for the Villa del Poggio Imperiale:


 * 1 Viaggio nell'esotismo settecentesco alla Villa del Poggio Imperiale a Firenze : il riallestimento de  Branca, Mirella [Livorno, Italy] : Sillabe, c2011


 * 2 Poggio Imperiale a Poggibonsi : il territorio, lo scavo, il parco  Cinisello Balsamo (Milano) : Silvana, c2007


 * 3 La Villa mediceo lorense del Poggio Imperiale  Faini, Fiammetta Firenze : Becocci/Scala, c1995


 * 4 Parma, Petiot, gli stucchi della Villa del Poggio Imperiale a Firenze e l'empirismo inglese  Amonaci, Anna Maria Parma : Tipografie riunite Donati, 1994


 * 5 La fortezza di Poggio Imperiale a Poggibonsi : un prototipo di cantiere dell'architettura militare d  Masi, Luciana Poggibonsi : Lalli, [1992]


 * 6 Oggetti di arte sacra alla Villa del Poggio Imperiale  Firenze : Il Diaspro, Polistampa, [1990]


 * 7 La Villa del Poggio Imperiale  Villa del Poggio Imperiale (Florence, Italy) Roma : G. Bretschneider, 1979


 * 8 La villa del Poggio imperiale  Marangoni, Matteo, 1876-1958 Firenze : Alinari, [1923]


 * If my list of eight cites needs a pleasant supplement then let me know. Cheers. FelixRosch   ( TALK ) 16:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Felix, Have you a link fr the floor plan? Giano   (talk) 18:34, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Giano; There are two links I know of which are not very high resolution and may have overprinted watermarks. You might try this, or this . Cheers. FelixRosch   ( TALK ) 18:46, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Mmmmmm! Neither are that brilliant are they? Let me have a scout around in one of the libraries. Giano    (talk) 18:49, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Over the week-end I had added a short section on Interior furnishing which you might glance at. Next is for a short section on Interior architecture which you had mentioned, possibly for each one of the three historical phases as you outlined them already in the article. One paragraph each for the original plan, then the expansion to the T-shaped floor plan, and finally to the rectangular floor plan as it is seen today. If that's what you had in mind then I might try to continue with it, or maybe you can add some other ideas. Cheers. FelixRosch   ( TALK ) 16:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Felix: I had a look at the new section and made one or two small alterations. It's good, but not over clear; I wish we could find a clearp map from somewhere; I may have time to draw one of the Christmas/New Year period, so keep going - you're doing a good job. Giano    (talk) 15:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Giano; That was a nice version you did of the Interior design section for which I had left a short message on my Talk page . It looks better than I thought was possible without having the illustrated floor plan, which Cresti did have. I still have about two weeks to do improvements/adjustments to the article to get it closer to peer review quality. What do you see as the next priorities? I did add a short section on the chapel which you might look at. Greetings of the season. FelixRosch   ( TALK ) 19:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Arbcom?
Hi, honey. I'm pretty sure I'm wasting my breath here, as you're unlikely to have the time or the inclination, but have you considered running for arbcom this year? Do you realise that there are nine slots to be filled, only four candidates as of this moment, and less than three days left of the nomination period? You'd be great at it, etc, but well, I probably am wasting my breath. This is part of a highly selective campaign; I've asked two other people. Bishonen &#124; talk 08:20, 16 November 2014 (UTC).
 * Nice idea My Sweet, but I have absolutely no intention of telling the Foundation my real name or anything else that could even be remotely construed to be personal detail. In short, I don't trust them, so that prevents me providing what would be a most entertaining and beneficial period for Wikipedia. Giano    (talk) 15:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, My Sweet, do we have a link to the nomination page. Giano    (talk) 18:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Strangely enough, I have been toying with the idea of humbly submitting my own august name. If that extremely dubious Foundation want my credentials they only have to look in Debrett's. Of course, though, i do have memories of my last charitable attempt to join the Arbcom when I was cruelly assassinated one one of Mr Wales' very unpleasant, and ugly leather clad henchmen. However, one attempts to do one's duty to the masses. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh la, la, he has absolutely no intention, and would like a link to the candidate page. Riight. Here. I hope you've spent the interval profitably, polishing your candidate statement! Actually, the election authorities have apparently realised the gravity of the situation, because they now provide a notice and links at the top of your watchlist. I was rather surprised they didn't before — or maybe I only noticed it just now. Not sure I'll be able to keep Darwinbish in check this time — she'll probably submit her own statement the moment I fall asleep tonight. Bishonen &#124; talk 19:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC).


 * A shame, I was going to endorse Bish's plea, we need gadflies. They already know who I am as I've met a couple of them so it's too late for me to worry about it. Dougweller (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The notice was up at least from 10 November and made me ask my question, can't wait to place the same before Darwinbish, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:06, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Apart from Secret, I've never heard of any of them - it doesn't look too promising does it? However, I have no intention of identifying so that is rather that.  Giano    (talk) 22:28, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

ANI
Since you're apparently stalking my contribs every three minutes, I doubt this is truly necessary, but I might as well follow procedure.

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Kevin Gorman (talk) 22:07, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It's unusual to come across someone quite as droll as you Kevin. Giano    (talk) 22:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit on GGTF Talk page
I noticed your edit on the GGTF Talk page where you were replied to a comment Kevin Gorman. I understand that the two of you don't get along but making comments like "you're really a very foolish boy" is disruptive and inappropriate because it comments on the contributor, not the content. There are many problems, strife, and negative energy on that page already and the snark in that comment is neither welcome nor helpful. Thanks! Ca2james (talk) 22:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note that I left this post before I saw the previous section concerning the ANI report. Ca2james (talk) 22:19, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course you did. Have you been blinkered all your life or is it a latter day affliction? Giano    (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you're trying to insult me somehow but I'm not understanding your point. Ca2james (talk) 01:27, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * No, you wouldn't. Giano    (talk) 09:00, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

You will find this amusing
I have started an article. No, that's not the amusing part, although I'll admit it's a vanishingly rare occurrence; I think I've started all of three articles in all these years. What's amusing is that it is an architectural article. Seriously. Okay, you can stop laughing now. The article is Integral House, and it's nowhere near finished, just scratching the surface, but I've put a bunch of potential references on the talk page to start building it out. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Risker (talk) 05:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Pardoning the turkey
Hey Giano, just popped over and saw that you've run-in with a few turkeys this holiday season. Just wanted to stop by and give you a hug. And to remind you, it's less-worse than seven years ago, vis-à-vis "all the cyber-stalking accusations", if you will. At least no one's head's on a thong. Be well. Merry Hanukkah, Happy Christmas, Cheery Kwanzaa, Joyeux Noel, etc. etc. etc. SevenYearsLater (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
Please stop using talk pages such as Talk:Wikimedia Commons for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you.    FDMS   4    21:42, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I have not the remotest idea what you are talking about FSMS4, and if it concerns Wikimedia Commons, I strongly doubt that anyone other watching this page does either. My total December edits must be in single figures, and I'm sure that none of them are to such a disreputable place as Commons. Furthermore, if you can't come here in a polite fashion, then do not come at all. I suggest that you confine yourself to Commons where doubtless your talents are more appreciated. Giano    (talk) 08:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I checked when I removed the notification, and it was for a post way back in February. Not sure why you bothered to restore this and answer this Giano; it's merely a waste of your time. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 08:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No it's not because on further investigation this person has had the audacity to revert a very valid comment which I made at commons a year ago - a year ago! I've now rolled him back and let that be the end of the matter . It's just typical of the censorship that one expects from these Commons people. I don't recommend anything being uploaded to their thieving website. Giano    (talk) 08:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * a) I already admitted that I shouldn't have left that note at User talk:FDMS4, sorry again for having done so. b) Not sure why that matters, but I'm not a "Commons person" myself anymore ( [1] [2] ). c) Your comment obviously had nothing to do with improving the Wikipedia article, and its removal obviously wasn't vandalism. I would welcome it if an uninvolved user (like Risker) could undo this rollback abuse.     FDMS   4    12:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I woudl welcome people like you minding their own business, and not stirring trouble months after the event. Now I suggest you go away and find something constructive to do with your time. Giano    (talk) 13:28, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Unconstructive comments
Come on, please don't make comments like this. Thanks. Sergecross73  msg me  02:36, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * ....and who precisely are you? For your information and that of any interested others, I shall say things exactly as I see them. I had assumed that Rationalobserver was a trouble making sock long before a presumably competent checkuser found that to indeed be the case. That some half-drugged admin and his mates find that hard to believe is of no consequence to me and the many others who have had the misfortune to meet Rationalobserver around the site. Now, unless you have something of vital importance to say, please don't bother to post here again. Giano    (talk) 10:02, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You write a response in a discussion I start, and then ask who I am? Regardless of your selective memory, my point was not to debate whether or not RationalObserver is a sock. My point is, don't make comments with the sole purpose of antagonizing/threatening users. Sergecross73   msg me  11:45, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Well you have made your point and I shall ignore it. Now don't let me detain you here, I'm sure you have all sorts of useful things to be doing; run along now. Giano    (talk) 22:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * PS: I have read the comments here - what a hoot. 22:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

==Yo Ho Ho== 

Dougweller (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Dougweller (talk) 13:28, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * That's very kind Dougweller, and a very happy and holy Christmas to you too. Giano    (talk) 14:59, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Precious again
  architecture

Thank you for quality articles on architecture, such as Palladian architecture, for enlightening discussions, for the spectacular architecture of your user page, for fulfilling wishes, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC) Two years ago, you were the 345th recipient of my  Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:30, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Gerda, I'm sure that I'm unworthy of such an honour. Giano    (talk) 15:01, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You are entitled to your POV, but I don't share it. In 2014, you have been observed fighting like a tiger for an innocent victim, - about the best you can do to win my respect! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

92.247.137.106 (talk) 13:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)