User talk:Giano II/archive 6

 Public letter to the ArbCom Thank you for arranging to have my blog cleaned. I am pleased that the "hate speech" stigma has been removed, but as I can't access that account, the nice clean block log has limited advantages. I regard that particular block as the underlying cause of all subsequent blocks, but that is neither here nor there.

I appreciate many are pushing for changes on IRC, as to my mind that is entirely what this is and the last RFArb was centred on, and it is a great pity both cases did not include IRC in their title rather than just my name, as that would have focused people's attention in a more positive way on the problems causing all this mess.

Of course another problem is consensus, but to prevent these problems occurring time and time again a consensus to clean up the Admin channel has to be reached. The immediate and previous trouble makers Betacommand, Chairboy and Naconkantari need to be desysoped as an example of what happens when pointless and vindictive blocks are executed by inexperienced admins sent by others. The two following links give just a mild flavour of some of the problems such behaviour has caused:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Betacommand&oldid=96174238#Block_of_Irpen_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Betacommand&oldid=96174238#Let_us_find_out_what_happened

It seems Kelly Martin and Co. are being "sweetness and light" on the channel at the moment (are they are running scared?) but the very moment this case is closed the problem will just begin again. The arbcom could fix things so I appear to be being left alone, but what about Irpen and the other editors with whom they disagree? Many of them are less vociferous then me. Then of course the great unanswered question is how many unknown editors have they already driven off, that we never even knew about, the good editors who just quietly disappear.

The arbcom have a few of the very many logs circulating. If they fail to address the problems, which they now know full well exist, then future troubles will make the present seem as nothing. This is not said as a threat from me, but as a fact which is blindingly obvious to many many editors. Giano 22:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Someone emailed me some questions today ...and while writing the reply, I decided I would post it here too, as it sums up my feelings about Wikipedia perfectly:

How am I feeling? Pretty pissed off! I was talking to another well known and respected editor yesterday - he still is adamant he is not returning in the forseable future - the way he has been treated who can blame him. Others are editing - albeit at a very reduced rate - the enthusiasm is no longer there.

I blame the arbcom completely for this mess (not the new individuals - they have only been there 5 minutes) but the others, and that includes God knows how many others on the arb-list long retired who still have an input. These people have known about all this IRC "rubbishing of other editors" for years, (one leading present arbcom member is one of the chief culprits) - but the arbcom have clubbed together to save their own. This encyclopedia should be run like a university, as it is it is managed like an establishment for mal-adjusted infants.

I have been fortunate to mix with some of the (IMO) best and most qualified people in the world to write on their individual subjects. I don't say this lightly as I know the identities of some of them. That these people (who universities would fight to employ) are treated with such disdain by a pack of semiliterate high school kids is depressing, because it spells the writing on the wall for wikipedia.

It has been suggested I take an interest in RFAs, but I don't want to mould future administrators - it is up to the arbcom to define strict criteria to ensure only the responsible get through. As it is any little fool who has chatted on IRC for ten days can become an admin, and attack long and established editors of the highest calibre, I don't refer to myself as I can throw a punch with the best of them. I refer to those who have written brilliant pages for this project, but disappear when a little twit with an admin badge threatens them. If these tiresome admins don't like testy bad tempered old professors (I am not one) then stay away from centres of academia - which is what wikipedia should be. These people are the soul of the project. They are creating not only the encyclopedia but its reputation for excellence.

I only mix (by my limitations of interests) with an artistic/literary crowd, but I have been informed by no less a person than a European Finance Minister that Wikipedia's "economics department"  is of the very highest standard and consulted. Professors of economics at one leading university now google whole phrases from student essays to ensure they are not lifted wholesale from Wikipedia. I know for certain (a close relation was the culprit) that one professor was handed his own plagiarised work. I also know for certain that pages on International European Law can only have been written by lawyers of the highest standing. Why should these people freely donating their valuable time have to contend with a bunch of kids from IRC? Wikipedia is more than fortunate to have these people. If keeping a pack of unruly kids and fools off the backs of leading experts is preferential treatment, then yes they should be given preferential treatment, just as they would be in any other seat of learning. I can tell you categorically that one of Britain's most eminent and respected writers has left Wikipedia tired of it all.

Wikipedia has been very very fortunate in its editors but it now has a problem! and it needs to address it now! The good editors need to be encouraged and retained. Wikipedia is not an ego trip for a few admins and arbs who couldn't write a sensible academic page to save their lives. The arbcom have the IRC logs. They have the proof. Now they need to stand up and be brave enough to do what we voted them into power to do. They need to sort it now, not tomorrow, now! Giano 10:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You say "It has been suggested I take an interest in RFAs, but I don't want to mould future administrators - it is up to the arbcom to define strict criteria to ensure only the responsible get through." We have no power to do that, and, frankly, are dependent as you are with respect to selection of administrators. There just isn't enough time to attend to it. To vote knowledgeably I would have to spend time investigating the edits and actions of the candidates. I can't do that due to other projects and arbitration duties. I would like to see some changes made, but my opinion in that regard is little more than that of any user. I would simply see more care taken and that arbitrary requirements not be imposed. Fred Bauder 22:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
Not sure if you want discussion to take place here or somewhere else, or if you would prefer this page to be just the open letter for a while, but I agree with what you say about the need to attract and retain writers on expert matters. The trouble is that just having expert writers was tried with Nupedia, and the wikipedia model seems to suggest that content added anonymously, and an army of wikignomes to organise other content and tidy things up is needed to reach the popularity levels we have. Those who are primarily writers also need to be able to work (directly or indirectly) with those who are janitors (admins) and those who write the code (the developers) and those who undo vandalism (anyone) and block troublemakers (admins). Getting the balance right is difficult, but I agree with the central point you are making, that those who are experts and run into troublemakers should have somewhere to complain to, rather than feeling they have to leave. There is also the flip side of the coin, even those who edit their little corner undisturbed for a long time should not become complacent. The open and public nature of the project means there is always the possibility that a troublemaker will come along. If the editors in question don't want to spend the time persuading cranks and nuts that they are wrong, or educating those who weren't aware of the most recent published work in an area, then they need to be aware that this is actually how Wikipedia works. Not ideal, but please suggest how this can be improved to both retain experts and not excessively restrict editing. Carcharoth 11:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your message above
Hi Giano,

Above, you describe me as a "trouble-maker" and insist that I be de-sysopped. User:Rebecca has promised to begin an RFAR against me in response to my block of you, and I hope that you participate. My block was endorsed by Mr. Wales and there was no conspiracy against you, I hope that a formal proceeding will help assuage your concerns. You have, on a number of occasions, referenced logs that you felt were damning. I encourage you to re-read them carefully, you may find some of the things you ascribed to me to be in error. If you feel that I have violated a policy or acted in a manner unbecoming a wikipedian, please let me know so I can address your concerns.

We're all supposed to be working together to improve the project, and some of the vitriol being exchanged is working against those goals. I hope you'll receive this message in the spirit with which it was sent and join me in helping heal the rifts that have formed.

Regards,

C HAIRBOY (☎) 15:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * For the benefit of anyone who is wondering what on earth this is all about. It seems that the case concerning me re-opened by the arbcom (very foolishly and without any serious thought  IMO)  has vanished into thin air, now that the arbcom finally realise it concerns more the behaviour of  a small cluster of admins on the IRC admin channel  than it does me.  While I can quite see how embarrassing it must have been for the arbitrators to see one of their number forced to recuse after joyfully voting to ban me and/or parole me (in short get rid of me because I know too much and won't shut up)  - I think it would be helpful if not courteous (remember all their talk of incivility) if we were told exactly what is happening.  We now know, and indeed the arbitrators now know that  Betacommand, Chairboy and Naconkantari were acting under very strange circumstances indeed with their continued blocks of me  I still  hardly dare edit, for wondering from where the next template will drop. It will be a pity if the arbcom's failure to act now results in further disruptive and damaging RFArb cases.  From what I can gather at the moment though that seems to be their wish.  I hope this dithering and failure to act, is not a ploy to prevent us ever finding out that one of their leading members has said in IRC that many of us are idiots who need to be got rid of.  The arbcom needs to clean up IRC admins and I'm beginning to think their own house too in order that wikipedia can progress in a healthy fashion Giano 16:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Chairboy. Thank you for your very measured, reasonable and concilliatory words above. I find them a refreshing contrast from some of your previous words and actions and a step in the right direction. However, you must forgive Giano for doubting them. So perhaps as a sign of good faith and sincerity on your part, would it be too much to ask that you give up your sysop mop, temporarily until the RFAr case against you is resolved? Consider too that should the RFAr go against you, such a voluntary display of humility and accoutability would be in your favor. Thanks--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of the existance of the RFAR, could you provide a link? - C HAIRBOY (☎) 22:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The one User:Rebecca has promised to begin against you. I'm sure you'll be provided with the link then.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I asked her on her talk page, and she archived it without response. When I followed up with her on IRC, she said that she had changed her mind, so no RFAR that I know of. - C HAIRBOY  (☎) 22:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, perhaps she thought that since your actions had Jimbo's approval, the RFAr didn't stand a chance. Still, such an act of sincere contrition on your part would be a noble step in the direction of concilliation.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Contrition for what? - C HAIRBOY (☎) 22:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well for starters for making a bad situation, which was starting to calm down, much worse. For conspiring off Wiki to drive away a valuable contributor. And generally for conduct unbecoming an admin. Someone has to make amens in the situation, so why not you?--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well jeepers. I didn't conspire against anyone, I'm not sure which specific behavior you feel was conduct unbecoming an admin, and regarding your other charge, well, I'd rather not inflame the situation any further, and I think this really isn't the venue for this discussion.  If you'd like to discuss this further, let's either move it to my talk page or keep it on yours alone.  Continuing this here is just fodder for more conflict, and Giano II doesn't need his talk page spammed. - C HAIRBOY  (☎) 23:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had hoped from your statement at the top of this chain that you were ready to own up to your part in this mess. I guess I misunderstood. Obviously we have not been reading the same IRC logs. The fault here is mine, for hoping that a Chairboy would act as a chairman:)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

-- (Break inserted for clarity, the message below is in response to Giano II above.)
 * I knew there might be trouble due to your calls for desyopping. I think the consensus is that we would like to see you come back, but we are also reluctant to continue the drama with respect to the issues you raise. The motions regarding you were removed because we were not getting anywhere. However, we are doing what we can to improve the situation on IRC. The disturbing situation there has been discussed at great length. Fred Bauder 22:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Disturbing situation" well at least that is one up on "Giano is paranoid" now go and tell it to those on IRC and do something about it fast - before they gang up on the next victim! God in heaven, it's like bashing one's head on a brick wall. Giano 23:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh yes Fred, neither have I forgotten you wanted me banned for bringing it to your attention! Giano 23:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I am very seldom on IRC, other than the arbcom channel. Fred Bauder 02:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah Fred, I'm so glad to see that IRC has not corrupted you as well.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I did get this response from a new Arbcomma . Regards --Mcginnly | Natter 17:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Just a point of fact, no-one was forced to recurse, at least, not in the sense that there was any rule that required it. People make mistakes, and sometimes they have the opportunity to correct them. It's not something we should take undue pleasure from. Being sinned against doesn't give one license to sin. Cheers. Ben Aveling 23:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Bolox he was forced after a long debate and many emails and much discussion. Glad you too agree I and many others have been "sinned against". Regarding you edit summary "Time for forgivness on all sides please" please don't be impertinent I shall be the one to decide when it is time for "forgiveness" - and it is a long way off yet - beleive me! all the acusations of paranoia etc are still ringing in my ears - so don't you dare come here preaching about "forgiveness".  Those people are all still on IRC admins plotting as we speak against the nest target - Oh and you had better beleive it Giano 00:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * He was encouraged to by a number of people, including myself, and he agreed to trust our judgement over his own. Had he not, then maybe he might have been forced to.  But good sense prevailed and it didn't come to that.
 * I don't really care what happens on IRC admins, so long as it stays there. Sticks and stones and all that.  It's what happens on wikipedia that matters.  There may have been some people motivated by malice, and others that made mistakes.  It happens.  Life is too short to buy into every battle that offers itself.  Forgivness isn't a gift to them, it's a gift to yourself.  Regards, Ben Aveling 00:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ben, are you really master of the "point of fact" you present? I for my part don't know what happens inside what is, to the ordinary community member, the black hole of internal ArbCom discussion. Do you? I only know that such discussions are liable to carry more weight than the community "encouragement" whereof you speak. I know you mean well, but I'd be honestly surprised if your aphorisms helped a lot on this page and at this time. Bishonen | talk 14:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Am I doing any good? Maybe not.  But I'd rather try and fail than not try.  This is what James said to me: I disagree with your disagreement. I am not "heavily involved"; in my opinion, I am not involved at all. ...  I have now recused, however, in large part because you (and apparently others) for some reason consider me "involved".  I have no proof but I believe he was trying to act honourably and just made a couple of mistakes.  When I look back at this sorry mess, it seems to me that Giano had no control over what happened.  His reaction to the situation he encountered was to lash out, to try to hurt people, and I think he succeeded in that.  And perhaps some of them deserved to be hurt.  But he also hurt some people who didn't deserve to be hurt, either because they were just innocent bystanders trying to help or because they were dupes who needed help, not abuse.  The result was that Giano was played like a fish on a hook.  Everything he did reduced his credibility with almost everyone.  Had it not been for yourself and Geogre, Giano would IMHO have been permabanned.  Were I Giano, I would not be happy with that.  Maybe he is, in which case he doesn't need to change anything.  But if he'd like a bit more control over his own destiny, then he is going to have do some things a bit differently in the future.  Regards, Ben Aveling 21:22, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you being deliberately tiresome, or is it just something you can't help? I'm not sure what you are, other than less than helpful, so run along sonny - don't bother to come back. Giano 21:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Bishonen - sorry Ben you seem to be rather out of the loop, I rather think the arbcom have abdicated responsibility and given up.  So it is up to the individual editor to act as they see fit.  The arbcom no longer exists to protect you or the encyclopedia, they have simply disappeared.  I seems likely that  IRCadmin is running the joint - so beware. Giano 19:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree, but I don't have the time to explain why. If you trust me, accept that IRCadmin does not run this community.  They have some influence, as do we all.  Regards, Ben Aveling 21:22, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "If you trust me" - Thanks, I don't. Giano 21:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * G, I would be remiss visiting your talkpage without paying some words to our noble host. I hope you may find something here to your liking. Cheers & ciao--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

A comment from someone uninvolved
I'm an admin and I spend a lot of time on the -admins channel on IRC, and until this evening I wasn't really clear on exactly how this whole debacle had started (that damn userbox wheelwar, blocks, unblocks, desysoppings, resysoppings, et cetera ad nauseam).

I know it can't take the place of a timely apology from the people involved, but I would like you to know that I genuinely regret that you were blocked. You're a good editor, and your original comment was, albeit perhaps somewhat excessive in light of the revelation that the guy who created the userbox in the first place was a 14-year-old trying to be funny, not unreasonable.

I'm sorry that people are upset with each other. I would like to try to make peace. Okay? DS 04:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Than you DS for taking the time to come over here to offer your support. Sadly peace comes at a price the arbcom and IRC admins don't want to pay.


 * I'm glad you're an admin, because you will thus be aware of the problems. However,  while you appear to be aware that the paedophile problem was indeed caused by a "14-year-old trying to be funny" .  You seem though to be unaware why I was banned for the "hate speech" which has led to all these subsequent frequent bans and problems  and me being denounced by certain members (past and present) of the arb com.


 * My fateful and dreadful words were "We have people of all ages editing, we do not want or need those who have an inclination or even pretension towards paedophilia"


 * As you quite rightly point out Wikipedia is edited by the very young.  The  "hate speech" which has led to this entire problem (Brion Viber refused to remove the slur from my log, and Kelly Martin felt even me wishing it made ne a "prima donna") is still causing me so much trouble.  However, I stand by every word I said which led to that original block by Carnildo.  (For anyone desperate to yet again dig out the details all links from here  are helpful)  Any wikipedia editor who chooses to give an email address can be contacted by anyone, as a consequence  Whatever certain admins and members of the arbcom say and do, my opinion remains 100% unaltered.  I would do and say the same again whatever the "scumpit"  that is IRCadmins may feels about  the subject, and there is the root of this problem. Giano 14:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is also edited by the very intolerant and heartless, as I know from personal experience. I was almost put off creating any new material at all, and I deal with Wikipedia far less as a result. Like you I consort with literate, bright and positive folk, have academic and experiential curiosity, and am reasonably well connnected.  So, speaking as a kindred spirit, if I may presume, I say rejoice in your gifts and be thankful that you get to take yourself home whereas these people have themselves.  Or, as a friend of mine once put it - would you like to be them?  -  No.  Would they like to be you? - Definitely.  Mine's a Pernod with lots of iced water. -- FClef  (talk) 05:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

hihi

 * More intersted in the delicious Baroque behind the ladder, than boring old admin antics. Giano 12:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Aaron teaches dada art. Interested? &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  12:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Relax
Giano...just relax man...let discredited former admins like me take over from here:)!--MONGO 12:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

ANI
I have no reason to suspect that you'll listen to me on this, so please ask someone you listen to about: Geogre, Bish, whomever.

Your style of commentary as displayed in the recent (now closed) thread on the administrator's notice board is not only useless, it's harmful. Speaking as someone who shares (albeit less cantankerously) many of your views, I can't help but notice that the thread was "closed" due in no small part to your input.

Let us imagine that the world is divided into three camps: Your erstwhile cabal, the Gnostics like yourself who know of the cabal, and the great unwashed masses. Your comments bounce off the first group, add nothing to the knowledge of the second, and alienate the third.

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, try and tone it down. If not because it doesn't help your cause, but to stick it to the guys who say you can't.

brenneman 23:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, you are quite right I won't be listening to you, but as a matter of fact I have decided "probably" not to comment further.  I know the admin channel is full of rubbish, you, he, she, and it kmows that too, the only people who seem to be havinfg a problem realising that are its guardians and those who inhabit it, so I advise all editors to just ignore and freeze those "admins". Giano 07:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Question - what do you want?
Hi, Giano. I'm fairly new to enter this dispute, and I do so with some hesitation. I have, however, been following it for months, and even during a recent wiki-break with my own real-life issues, I sometimes took a peep at your talk page and at the ArbCom page to see what was happening. Of course it has nothing to do with me, and if you tell me to run along, I won't take offence. I'll even try to restrain myself from giving you a "cool down" block!

What I see when I look at this case is a brilliant editor who was turning out one featured article after another, and, while doing that, enjoying the social side of Wikipedia with some extremely nice friends. Then there was a completely unjustified and crazy block for "hate speech", and everything went downhill from there. I have no hesitation in saying that every block you have been given since then has in some way had its root cause in that outrageous "hate speech" block from last February.

As an admin who has written no featured articles, I really couldn't understand why two (then) admins were getting so upset at your "campaign for less bull" notice on your user page. I have in the past objected to users using their pages to make fun of other users, particularly in ways that attacked their dignity, but a general "you-may-not-get-the-respect-you-feel-you-deserve" message seemed completely unworthy of the battle it generated &mdash; especially from people who were not noted for civility themselves. My own closest wiki-friend has a "Welcome, but be warned: Enter at your own risk" notice at the top of his talk page, but so far has been fortunate enough not to attract the attention of senior Wikipedians who can't concentrate on writing an encyclopaedia while there's such a terrible threat that needs to be removed.

Anyway, the reason I'm here at your talk page now is to ask you what you want from Wikipedia? It's just a question, as I'm not in a position to negotiate. But it's something that I feel should be laid out so that we all know where we stand. In fact, I can't believe that nobody has asked you this so far. I don't have any direct experience with you, but I know you're a brilliant editor, and you seem to be very highly thought of by someone that I think very highly of. I do think you had every right to ask that your block log be cleaned (and in fact I e-mailed Jimbo a few weeks ago to say that Wikipedia owed you that much). Part of the problem was that the overturning of the blocks didn't say that there was no hate speech; they said that the block was outside of policy etc. Personally, I think if it had been cleaned immediately, a lot of the nastiness that occurred later could have been avoided.

Anyway, if you don't want to answer, I'll understand, but I'd like to know:


 * 1) What would you need from Wikipedia in order to be able to go back to editing happily, as you used to?
 * 2) If you don't get everything you want (and I'm sure you won't!), what would you need from Wikipedia in order to be prepared to stay here (as many people want you to), and to going back to behaving (almost) as if the whole thing had never happened? In other words, what's the minimum you could accept?

I'm delighted that your block log has been cleaned, but I'm not sure that you have modified your poor opinion of the ArbCom by even one percent as a result. My own view is that you should also be e-mailed a new password for the old account, that "cooldown" blocks should be stopped, and that admins should be prepared to warn and if necessary to block for harassment any user who keeps on putting warning templates on the talk page of established editors. (I know I'd be prepared to.) That's from the Wikipedia side. From your side, I think you should consider leaving out the remarks about inexperienced admins and corrupt ArbCom members. (I'm not asking you to stop thinking them, but I feel that those who agree already agree, and those who don't are not going to be convinced by you at this stage.) I do think you have been treated very badly on Wikipedia. I don't like what I've seen of the IRC logs, but don't know the full background. I think that Cyde's taunt about maybe knowing something that you don't was very inappropriate. But, more than anything else, I see a need to start discussing what you would require from Wikipedia (no matter how much), and what you'd be prepared to give back (no matter how little) in order for peace to be restored. The whole thing is very painful now.

Musical Linguist 13:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Than you Musical Linguist for what I see as a very fair assessment of the situation.

My wishes, which are no secret are very simple. I have said countless times, I can (and do) stick up for myself, many others do not, or feel unable to do so, and as a result for varying reasons they have suffered as a result of comment on the IRC admin channel. They are the people who need to be able to edit in peace, without fear of templates and blocks for ridiculous reasons.

The disgraceful IRC admin's channel needs to be abolished, and it's even more disgraceful leading members need to be de-sysoped to point out loudly and clearly  bullying and harassment will not be tolerated on Wikipedia.

My former unaccessible account has indeed had its block log cleaned but as you say I have been blocked since always as a result of the first disgusting block by Carnildo (who incidentally, has never apologised and since been promoted to glory against consensus - on whose orders I wonder?).

My problem, which is now Wikipedia's problem, is I won't shut up, and I won't shut up until this whole matter has been sorted, I want those who executed bad blocks (we can forget the templates) de-sysoped. I want those who called for bad blocks in IRC de-sysoped (why not just make the block themselves?). Finally, I want that channel abolished, with a thorough condemnation from the arbcom, quite how the arbcom will achieve this as one of their leading members considers himself the "owner" is their problem. The arbcom have allowed Wikipedia to be brought into disrepute - now they must sort it - or resign en mass themselves. Giano 14:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The devil you know versus the devil you don't
Just one comment on one specific thing (I'm not touching the broader dispute with a 10 foot pole). I have my own reservations about IRC. However, the real problem here is editor conduct, is it not? If some people get together and say rude things, or even coordinate on-wiki actions, is burning down the house they meet at going to help? Won't they just find a different place to meet? You won't generally find me on IRC, but it's an unavoidable fact of life, in my opinion. Maybe the best we can hope for is an IRC channel that has reasonable people in it, to help balance out the potential harm of whatever unreasonable people also go there. We can't make IRC go away- the most we could do is "drive it underground", which is a solution worse than the problem. Friday (talk) 18:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sadly so long as the channel in question is "invitation only" with invitations being given not just to selected admins but also selected favourites who are not admins there seems little hope. That the new police force employed to prevent future bad behaviour is comprised of  the usual old names of the channel - indicates little hope for improvement.  Better to do away with it completely. Giano 19:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You both make some very good points! I have, therefore, proposed a compromise here, in which I hope you will find some virtue.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 19:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Friday, driving it underground is not worse. Above-ground, the behavior in #wikipedia-en-admins serves to define a culture: people go there because that's where admins are supposed to go on IRC, and then they see how admins behave, and some will pick that up as the way Wikipedia's culture says admins should behave. If the same cliques met in their own private channels, at the very least newbies getting invites would have no illusions that they were entering a neutral area. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I think BoG has it right here. Paul August &#9742; 21:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You could be right. If it were up to me, I'd eliminate the IRC channels and tell people they're on their own.  I was assuming this was unrealistic in real life, though.  Friday (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well whatever, never fear Giano is here, and when I have my teeth into a page - however long, I always finish it eventually, usually to wide acclaim. Giano 19:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems extraordinary to me that anyone could think that IRC was "an unavoidable fact of life". --Wetman 20:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Here's another way to look at it- the editors who frequent whatever chat room was the problem will keep chatting somewhere, right? Do we want this somewhere to be an unknown place, or do we want it to be someplace where maybe there's some chance of oversight? I realize this is a tricky issue, and it'd be better if historically there had never been a wikipedia-related channel, but this cat is already out of the bag. These people will be chatting- we cannot prevent it. We may be able to influence where. Friday (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There is a difference between behavior which occurs on an official organ of Wikipedia administration, and behavior that occurs somewhere which has no official relationship to the encyclopedia. Paul August &#9742; 23:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, and that's gotta be the central point. The only good answer is that there should be nothing that presents itself as "the official IRC channel of Wikipedia".  But how do you, in practice, keep people from using a certain name?  Friday (talk) 06:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

admin irc
Hi Giano, I was going to comment at wp:an, but the discussion there has been boxed up. My apologies if this is old news to you, but I think it is important and hasn't been discussed much.

Abbreviated history - an admin irc channel or mailing list was first publically proposed (as far as I know) on the WikiEN mailing list. There were immediate requests that archives be made public, then harsh words for public archiving , as the channel was intended for sensitive issues. Further comments noted that discussing sensitive legal issues with a thousand admins wasn't too bright, and that prohibiting archiving would never stop leaks. The admin-irc channel was then created, not sure by who, and a good guy announced it in the interest of openness. See the Jan 2006 WikiEN archives for more.

This demonstrates (IMO) that the channel was created as wikipedia body, with specific mandates, after discussions in an official wikipedia forum. All actions there, including who the ops are, should be under the jurisdiction of and accountable to the arbcom or the wikipedia community. I know others disagree.

Anyway, as a disclaimer, I've never been in the admin-irc channel and only rarely visited irc in the past, can't remember the last time, although I joke "see ya in irc" to people who know my views of the place. --Duk 22:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh dear - ist it boxed up - so soon - I do wonder why, just like the discussion on Beatacommand's tal a couple of weeks ago, the second it starts to become interesting out come the boxes. Such a pity. Giano 22:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, it's been unboxed. Bishonen | talk 02:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC).
 * The discussion seems to have been shuffled off to a less visible page. I added some comments there . --Duk 04:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The whole thing is now ridiculous if Cyde, Mackensen and their friends want to inhabit a private world of spite then let them, so long as it is poweless and all opinions which eminate from there are shunned, ignore or laughed off, then what the hell. The place is and its occupants are thoroughly discredited.  I don't see there is a lot more to say, I shall be ignoring the actions and views of all IRCadmins and no-nadmin cronies from now on.  I advise all others to do the same, thus leaving wikipedia a better place. Giano 07:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

An editing matter
I know in the past you were concerned about the title Buckingham Palace Gardens. I believe, all that time ago, you thought it sounded pretty tatty. While expanding the article - ongoing process - I changed it to Buckingham Palace Garden.

I do make the point in the article that it is universally known as the Garden and have added that nickname to garden (disambiguation). -- FClef (talk) 01:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Much better. Giano 07:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm away for a while, my bird needs a name, please leave suggestions below. Giano 21:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to see the birdy back. I suggest naming it Aloysius. Picaroon 22:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Julius Seizure. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I think Alecto would be a good name.
 * Either that or Stymphalos.
 * Finally, may I recommend Flip the Bird. Geogre 22:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Eunice. For no particular reason. Pinkville 23:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I suggest "Hum". Paul August &#9742; 23:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A ferocious watch-bird to keep mischief-makers and evil-doers out. I assumed he was called Spike. Jd2718 23:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * /me lumbers past, stops in surprise, makes some unsuccessful grabs for the colibri. Moves on, tickled. Flutterzilla! Grrrr! [[Image:Bishzilla spin.gif|35px]] Bishzilla | grrrr! 02:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Rainbow Warrior? --Van helsing 08:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I love that name, I was rather thinking along the lines of "Woody" after woody-woodpecker, but these ideas are great, I shall keep thinking! Giano 21:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Colourful Italian bird? - Cicciolina of course. --Mcginnly | Natter 09:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Spumoni - C HAIRBOY (☎) 20:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Input required
Hi Giano, I've replied to your comment on my talk page. Paul August &#9742; 20:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Actual encyclopedia-building question
Hey there. I came to you before on my last attempt, I'm trying to head off a collision course for my second one - who do you normally get to copyedit your articles before you send them off to FAC? I've had some excellent help from Hoary and ONUnicorn, but I'm wondering if you have certain old standbys that may pitch in. Or, conversely, whether you're simply that good. Let me know when you have a shot, certainly no rush. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I am deeply hurt that you think I may need a copy editor - what makes you have these very upsetting (to me) thoughts. I'll have you know I attended for a short time one of America's finest universities, I am still spoken of there in hushed tones, even they cannot beleive I chose them as my alma mater. Giano 19:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Your comments at User_talk:Mackensen
Make you sound like a big, spoiled baby. Just so you know. You might change your tone a bit if you want people to cooperate with you. --BenBurch 22:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Few have co-operated with me so far, and I've not too bad, so if now the truth is out - if many are now feeling very naive and stupid - then that is their problem. I am hugely supportive and thankful of the band (they know who they are) who have been wiser than the herd. Thanks for dropping by. Giano 22:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I think your tone is why. You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar, as Grandmother Burch used to say.  --BenBurch 22:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice but I seem to have caught a whole hornet's nest so far, so I'll stick to my own methods. I had a granny too - she was a Borgia. Giano 22:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Please
Please, can you stop responding to comments that you feel are provoking you? Tony's comments were completely uncalled for, but so are your responses. I hope you'll agree with me that absolutely nothing productive is coming out of the incivility and hostility going back and forth between you and other editors, so I am firmly asking you to just stop it and go back to doing great work in the encyclopedia. The mudfight in WP:AN is becoming disruptive. I am leaving Tony a message with the same request. Thank you. Cowman109 Talk 22:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Blame the arbcom! Not me, they have ignored and hoped all this would wash under the carpet Giano 22:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Cowman, yet again you try to reduce it to civility. Giano, myself and Tony, from what i can tell, are least concerned about incivility. Manners are nice and dandy but not the major crux here. The true concern Giano and I have is the block orchestration. See here where I outlined it. --Irpen 22:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * By all means come to the bottom of the block orchestration, I support you in filing the arbcom case to come to the root of the matter as the block orchestration is indeed a major issue, but comments off to the side that have no purpose other than insulting your opposition are disruptive, such as "Go tell it to IRC Tony, you have more credence there." and "Why don't you go and do something useful for once like write a page. We've all heard quite enough from you to last a lifetime." are incivil and only serve to escalate matters - as Irpen is creating an arbcom case, it would be more productive to instead focus on the issues there, yes? Cowman109 Talk 22:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * compared to what is said on IRC - the above is nothing. So please go and advise else where. Giano 22:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * oh and PS statements and words are uncivil, uncivil words lead to incivility. OK Giano 22:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks, I always mix up such prefixes :D(is that even the right word? I'll just go ahead and tell people my German is better than my English..). But yes, what has been said in the past in IRC was indeed harmful and awful, I've heard it myself. Things have certainly improved given the new recent changes and such talk is strictly prohibited now, though. Nonetheless, such awful incivility (I hope I used that correctly :/) from others does not make it right to be uncivil in return. Being the better man and not stooping down to their level is the key to such situations. I only say this from a perspective of trying to calm things down so people can focus on the real issues without such drama. Cowman109 Talk 22:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * While I agree with most of what you say it is a sad fact of life that a certain class of person only understands their own language therefore to attempt communication in a more educated form would be futile, and indeed be rather patronising to them Giano 23:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, the medium of the internet does generally lead people's words to be poorly represented and often misinterpreted. My mother's tongue would be Spanish, however, despite the fact that I was never taught it thoroughly enough to have mastered it, so that likely hindered my English-learning -- anyway, thanks for listening! :) Cowman109 Talk 23:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Giano!
Thanks for your comments on the Michelangelo page abbout the need to source and cite info. The sex business drags on endlessly.... it seems as if the major focus of both the Michelangelo and Leonardo pages is the issue of sexual proclivities.

My response to the Leonardo problem has been to create a separate article, jjust to clean up the main page. Yeah, people are always being accused of having hidden agendas. I have to confess that my hidden agenda was simply to make the Leonardo article more kiddie friendly. On one hand, I am not so delicate about unseemly bodily functions as some we could mention but on the other hand, the article was totally lopsided.

Tell me, is Margrave an alter ego of Lady Catherine, or what? I kkeep getting this horribly horrible feeling that the person might actually be for real! But he/she has just slammed into me for my "penal colony" association, and makes some sort of presumption about my breeding and background ... so it makes me wonder... Perhaps this is someone I knew once who has come back to haunt me.... it hardly bears considering...

Have you looked at the article on Renaissance architecture lately? Someone called Brosi has bought into it, to great effect. I think it's looking good but I'm still considering whether to chop it up and make a main article out of the Italian section. Will you let me know what you think.

--Amandajm 09:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry I am not Margrave (or Brosi), so you are barking up the wrong bush. I'm not hugely interested in Leonardo - I don't remember ever having edited the page. However, I don't think it needs to be "kiddy friendly" as in my experience "kiddies" generally like the rude bits best, so it might encourage them to read. In a biography there is no harm mentioning sexuality, so long as what is written is relevant, not gratuitous and above all true.  If a fact is not generally accepted, well known, or contraversial then it should have an inline cite, which enables the reader to explore further and then form his own opinion.  This is one of the occasions when I think inline cites are a good idea.


 * Finally, no Renaissance architecture should not be chopped up, the Renaissance was not exclusive to Italy, and one complete page fully covering a subject is better than several, it also puts say the English Renaissance into context with the Italian, or that of the Low Countries if it is in the same article. Thus it is clearer and easier to understand.  I'm not only against "kiddy friendly" but also pandering to the intellect of those with low concentration spans. Giano 09:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, FWIW, ideally Renaissance architecture would contain an overview of the whole topic, and, following Summary style, if one part of an article became overwhelming, then it should be moved to a daughter article, and the daughter article should then be referred to and summarised back in the parent article. This approach has the benefit that the daughter article can be referred to elsewhere (for example, Italian Renaissance architecture or Renaissance architecture of Italy could be referred to in Renaissance architecture and architecture of Italy).  -- ALoan (Talk) 11:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you ALoan, I'm sure Amanda will bear that in mind. However, in a complicated subject like Renaissance architecture where one has to constantly refer to architectural motifs and developments in terms not usually in the vocabluary of the the layman, it is easier to have everything together, so it is readily understood, and evolution of features from one country to another can easily be seen. Giano 11:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Nice to be out, gruel is so unpleasant. --Mcginnly | Natter 13:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And more thanks (you're a model wikipedian today!) for your intervention at WP:ANI - DG's made a full apology so I'm happy to leave it there. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Gosh! I think I'll go out and but a lottery ticket. Giano 16:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm off to buy a bottle of Gin - being this understanding has really taken it out of me :-) --Mcginnly | Natter 16:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah! you'll need to speak to the girlfriend about that one - she mixes the drinks in our house - (Free pouring cocktail bartender in previous existence). Mojitos are the current flavour of the month, but sometimes you can't beat a G&T.--Mcginnly | Natter 23:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Stay off my talk page
And as someone who has deleted my comments before, you are a god-damned hypocrite. --Ideogram 22:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sometimes one reads edits like the one above and this one here and one thinks! Giano 01:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have dealt with these edotors here Giano 11:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

flypast
Dear Giano, - you'll remember me as the creator of this. RJASE1 has nominated it as a Good Article and put it up for peer review. He also placed it on the Military History Project in Start Class (on their assessment scale) and then raised it to Class B.

That's all well and good. However Looper 5920 has reversed the second move and attacked what he perceives as a UK bias in the article. I worry that the article will lose its character and original focus. I am particularly upset because it had an ENTIRE section on internationality and I did struggle to incorporate everything I could find.

Would you please support the article as a Good Article candidate and join the discussion at talk:flypast and lend whatever support and muscle you can.

Thanks. --FClef (talk) 02:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll look but I know nothing at all about British aeroplanes, and not much more about any other country's. My sole interst in planes is that they get me from A to B in the least possible time.  Sorry. Giano 11:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Tony Sidaway
Giano, I have had my problems with him as well. Perhaps it is a rite of passage here on Wikipedia. He wrong targets users and situations escalate.--Fahrenheit451 02:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message. In the interests of public safety I don't think I will comment further on this interesting topic. Giano 11:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Memos to me

 * Interesting page to watch: IRC channels/Personal views regarding IRC
 * Thinking about responses to this Adminship survey

 Where do we go from here I have commented here that I feel the proven problems of IRC#admins have had a very good public airing, people are now able to form their own opinions of that channel without further help from me. So now is probably an opportune moment to calm things down a notch or two. Unless I'm attacked by the occupants of #IRCadmin here or on IRC again, I will try to say no more on the subject. While I will attempt to forgive I shall certainly not forget, and any further abuses directed towards me or any other editor will have me out of my cave in double quick time.

Too many chateaux
Glad to see that the above seems to have been sorted out, hopefully for good. I hope you don't mind me raising that Chateau Grimaldi question again? To jog your memory, as the thread seemed not to have been archived in your talk page archives, my earlier question was here, and you replied thus. Mcginnly was kind enough to help out and we had a discussion on my talk page here (I may archive the page soon, as we are in a new month). Mcginnly suggested I ask Wetman, who was also kind enough to help out, and there was a discussion here. As you can see, I got totally confused. Would you be able to add some thoughts? Possibly, based on this, I should chase up Mcginnly and Wetman again (who should add their comments if they happen to read this - I should drop them a note as well, if I remember). I wonder if the £700 book will help? :-) Carcharoth 14:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * £700 for a book, you could almost but the whole bloody chateau for that, can you give a link to the chateau in question - I've forgotten where we are talking about - I seem to remember a French farmhouse with pretentions enclosed byancient walls. The Grimaldi they were a proloific bunch who built hyndreds of castles - I wonder if the Palais Royale in Monte Carlo has a page? Giano 16:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah yes found the link - farmhouse with pretentions - ancient walls and an interesting chapel which says to me Knights Templar. Will have a proper look later. Giano 16:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There were three at last count. One of them was formerly a "bishop's palace" (the one you seem to be chasing after), and the other was a "tower built to defend a harbour" (in Cagnes, and is now a Picasso museum). The one I was interested in was, at one time, owned by Serge Voronoff, but seems to not be as famous as the others. Was probably just a shack with a few cages in the garden for him to keep his pet monkeys whose testicles he fried and served with salad and vinaigrette dressing, um, actually, he cut the testicles up and stuck them inside other people. They paid him lots of money to do this. Most of this is mentioned at the links I provided. How do you disambiguated between these chateau, just in case more than one attracts enough interest/notability for an article? Carcharoth 17:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Well I would have thought Chateau Grimaldi (Cagnes) and so on with the names in location in brackets. Do you want to write pags on all of them? Quick stubs just giving an architectural description which can later be embellished should be easier enough, if we have at least a photograph to work from? I will google Chateau Grimaldi (Cagnes) and we see what comes up. I don't do monkies and their testcles - McGinnly can do that section, anything medical to do with eyeballs and testacles makes me feel illGiano
 * I resemble that remark! Stone me Voronoff would make an interesting dinner guest. And I think Giano might have an appropriate family recipe? --Mcginnly | Natter 19:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Bugger of McGinnly, and take your home cooking with you, as one who came from a nation who invented the boiled brussel sprout you have a cheek even commenting on haute cuisine. Giano 21:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

LOL! I love brussel sprouts. Seriously! Anyway, thanks ever so much for starting that article. I was intrigued to see that the Grimaldi you linked to was a blue-link, not a red-link. I had remembered that the list at House of Grimaldi was lots of red links. But I looked further and discovered that Category:House of Grimaldi has lots of those people with articles already, so I'm going to correct those red links (well, create redirects, as someone obviously thought those names were reasonable, and then correct the links). I'm assuming the former bishop's palace (the more interesting Chateau Grimaldi), over on the other side of Provence, is still fermenting in the Giano cauldron? As for the monkey testicle chateau, that is "near Menton", and as Charles I, Lord of Monaco took the lordship of Menton in 1346, I think that is when the chateau, or a chateau there began to be called 'Chateau Grimaldi'. Looking at Menton, it says "Menton was founded by the Count of Ventimiglia as château de Puypin (ca. 1000) and inhabited by Ligurian people, it was owned by the Grimaldi family from 1346 until 1848" Possibly this Chateau de Puypin is what I am after as the one-time residence of Dr Moreau, ahem, I mean Dr Voronoff? But sadly Puypin chateaux are as thin on the ground around here as Grimaldi chateaux. Pepin is a more informative alternative spelling, but I'm losing the thread now, so I'll stop there. Carcharoth 00:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

After getting rather lost on the Grimaldi genealogy website, I think I found the right branch of the Grimaldis that had that cardinal that had that palace near Antibes (well, I think it was Antibes, don't quote me on that). Have a look at the family tree here. That has Geronimo who "became a cardinal". That is probably the "Jerome Grimaldi" mentioned at House of Grimaldi. There is another Geronimo mentioned a couple of generations later. The Wikipedia article says that this Geronimo was a cardinal as well, but I now doubt that. Seems more likely that a Wikipedia editor got the two Geronimos confused. Carcharoth 02:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Four pages later I have solved the confusion of the Cardinal and the chateau see my recent pages (all fully referenced courtesy of google) Serge Voronoff is in fact buried in the "Caucade Cemetery" in Nice and is listed as one of that cemetries residents here . It sounds like a lovely place "On a hillside in leafy Caucade, within spitting distance of Nice airport, is the last home of poets, princes, and countesses, all of them Russian..."  Giano 11:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * PS: I don't like the Grimaldi family tree (you cite) it is full of mistakes and doesn't tie in with the Roman Catholic Churche's record which tie in with all other records. Giano 12:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh dear. I was assuming it was OK, cos it looked nice... To be fair, they do talk about how confusing the topic is, and how some Grimaldis aren't actually Grimaldis, if you get my meaning. Carcharoth 01:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks awfully for the work you've done on this. An awful lot to digest here. Thanks for correcting the burial place of Serge Voronoff (could there be two Voronoffs, or maybe a memorial in the chateau to confuse things?). Two things for now: (1) Image:Girolamo Grimaldi.jpg is nice, but do you think you could add information on the image page as to where you found it? I deal in picture research quite a bit, and the exact origin of a picture (both in terms of who drew it and when, and where you got it from - scan from a book or from a picture library of historical images like the Library of Congress) is an important piece of information to have. (2) Do you know what the pictures of the Puyricard Chateau Grimaldi here are showing? The description here talk about a chapel, and the ruins of the palace (on the left in that picture?). The first link, the collection of photos, shows views of the chapel and ruins in the four pics in the top right corner. Clockwise from top: ruined wall next to chapel, ruined wall next to swimming pool, entrance to the chapel, interior of the chapel. I think this is the Romanesque style chapel you mention in the article. Anyway, I've added that link to the article. Carcharoth 01:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * (Wetman's silence is simply the result of ignorance. But the formula Chateau Grimaldi (Cagnes) is excellent. Southern French has a useful word for what is essentially a fortified farmhouse: bastie. Not every bâti is encyclopediable. --Wetman 09:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Aha Mr Wetman, I was wondering what you knew about les chateaux - seemingly not much more than the rest of us, which is a pity. I think the house at Château Grimaldi (Puyricard) does not even qualify as a bastie, if you look at the interiors of the place - to my eye it looks to have been "poshed up" for the rental market.  The chimneys project into the rooms - they should be flush with the walls, the ceilings are too low, and that chandalier is the dining room looks faintly ridiculous! No self respecting Frenchman with aristocratic pretensions would endure such interior design at any stage in history.  My guess is it just a much enlarged farmhouse, that some enterprising paysan built within the castle walls probably using stone from the ruins.  Regarding Carcharoth's point - I cannot beleive there would be two Serge Voronoffs - both doctors dying at roughly the same time in roughly the same place, both famous enough for a cemetery to be boasting about having the body, also European countries tend not to favour home burials (lowers property values) - possibly there is a memorial to him - but at which chateau? - we know it can't be the Picasso museum, so it leave one of the other three, I can find nothing about the 4th (The red link one) apart from a rental advertisement - we of course have to consider the possibility of ebn more Ch. Grimaldis.  My hunch is it is the Puyricard one, but they are hardly likely to advertise "come and have a holiday on the site of the monkey castrator's cage".  Looks like we will have to keep searching, I wonder if it is worth asking a question on the french wiki to see if an editor ythere knows the answer? Giano 14:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Does anyone speak french? (unfortunately this a lamentable gap chasm in my education)- it sounds like a phone call to a local historian might be the best way to resolve this, or at least contact with someone in the area willing to do some legwork to the local library. I'll post a request at the France-related topics notice board and WikiProject France. --Joopercoopers 14:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the chapel and ruins qualify as being the remains of Chateau Grimaldi. Whether the fact that people also refer to the 'large farmhouse' done up with 'antique French furniture' as a chateau, when in fact it looks to be a done-up hotel in the grounds of the former Chateau Grimaldi, is another matter. Does anyone know what people called the original building (since demolished, with only a few bits left) at the time of the eminent cardinal? Did they call it a chateau or a palace? I agree, someone in the local area would be best placed to answer these questions. My hunce about the Voronoff "chateau", is that this is a conflation from the history of Menton. The two best sources I found on Voronoff are this one, which says: "Voronoff built his own monkey house in Menton." and this TIME article from 1923. Looking further, and Googling for 'Voronoff' and 'Menton', I found another TIME article, this time from 1940, says Lily Pons: "was kissed by an ape at Dr. Voronoff's monkey farm near Menton, France". Another TIME article, from 1936, says "Singer Lily Pons went to see the monkeys kept by Menton's famed Rejuvenating Dr. Serge Voronoff, got too close to a cage, was soundly bussed by an ape named Rastus." - hmm. My theory of what the Grimaldi connection is with Menton, is, worryingly, the second hit on the Google search, my talk page: "On the other hand, lots of the Voronoff references say that he lived near Menton. This says that Grimaldi acquired Menton. Menton is eastwards along the coast from Ventimiglia, and has an associated chateau. It is possible that this chateau is colloquially known as the Grimaldi chateau, and is a third one, different from the two above." Also, note that Charles I, Lord of Monaco (one of the founding members of the Monaco branch of the Grimaldis), "took the lordship of Menton" in 1346. So Menton and the Grimaldis have been associated for many centuries. It would hardly be surprising if a chateau there was, or became, known as 'Chateau Grimaldi'. But this is just speculation at the moment on my part. There have actually been some books published about Voronoff, including a biography or two. Those would really help. Carcharoth 15:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Taj Mahal
I'm interested in sorting the Taj Mahal article out a bit. One question that isn't really dealt with in the article at the moment is the influence the Taj may have had on western architecture. Its fame travelled quickly after its construction completed in the late 1600's and by the early 1800's the British were effectively in control - the traditional conception of the Taj as a 'monument to love' presumably had some resonance with the romantic movement, but other than the Royal Pavilion (I assume), I wonder what buildings in Europe might trace a significant influence from the Taj. Any pointers gratefully accepted. thanks. --Joopercoopers 20:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * An intersting point Jooper (may I call you Jooper?), I shall not be involving myself in Taj Mahal, as most architectural experts (myself included) feel its inspiration was the reknowned Jaipur Restaurant in Milton Keynes, when one compares the flowing lines of the Jaipur to the rather stilted curves of the Taj, one realise the Taj was probably designed by a lowly member of the The Indian Institute of Architects. In the meantime have a look at Sezingcote Thanks though for asking me. Giano 21:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * PS: Aha! I see we have it already Sezincote House - that is the true interpretation of ndian architecture into England, noyt the Brighton Pavilion Giano 21:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Joopers is fine, Many thanks. --Joopercoopers 23:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Monte Carlo architecture


Following up your comment above about 'Palais Royale', I went looking, and could only find Palais Royal (Paris} and Palais Royale (Toronto). Possibly Prince's Palace of Monaco is what you were looking for? Looking at this tourist website, we have a stub on the 'Palais du Prince' (possibly what we call Prince's Palace of Monaco - though I'm not sure now they are the same thing), a moderate start on the Oceanographic Museum, a stub on the Saint Nicholas Cathedral, Monaco, and the 'Salle Garnier' building is covered in a section at Opéra de Monte-Carlo. Which of these was the Palais Royale you were thinking of? Carcharoth 15:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Monaco's Royal Palace (or whatever they call it - it started life as an old castel) I have a book somewhere on it, I will knock out a little more about it if I have time this week. = Christ! I have jusr read it!!!! That has to be the worst wikipedia article on a building I have ever read "transforming the mustard-yellow walls, to a light classy shade of pink" can go the second I start on it - how has that not been deleted? Giano 17:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably cos it's true. She did order a new paint job on the outside, apparently. Sure, the tone is not encyclopedic, but you have to pity the new Prince, being told by the wife to get on with painting the castle a new colour! Carcharoth 22:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * OK ther's a new page starting here I'll retain the "classy" pink! Giano 22:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I like the "Albert the watsit" bit... :-) Carcharoth 23:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

"Architecturally this was an exiting period, however Honore ignore all architectural trends and had designed one of the dullest palaces ever seen a complete hotch potch and that make the palace look like a second rate guest house on the from at Lyme Regis." LOL! I've been to both Lyme Regis, and Bognor Regis (the 'b*gger Bognor' comment from George the whatsit is most unfair). Are you really allowed to say things like that in an encyclopedia article? Do all your articles have humourous bits like that in them if you dig through the history before tidying up has taken place? :-) PS. 'aggrandize' is an English word. Not sure if it is the best word to use there. I see your note about whole sections being swept away during erratic work, so I won't comment in detail until you've finished. I hope you don't mind me occasionally peeking over your shoulder as you work on that article. It is fascinating to watch. Hmm. Street artistry is a noble tradition, isn't it? I wonder if writing a Wikipedia article while the 'world' (in its broadest sense) watches is a similar process. Hope you don't suffer from stage fright!! :-) Carcharoth 00:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't bother me in the least having peole watching, because the article at present will in no way resemble what goes onto main space, all I'm doing at the moment is researching the history so it is encyclopedic, and also so I know what I'm talking about, when that is all on the page, I'll start to waffle about the architecture (which I do know about) then add a bit of sex and violence to spice it up, and then re-write the whole thing! Most pages I write do have the odd thing like that in the history - bcause most websites and books on architectural subjects are written by the biased owners wanting to drag in the masses - rest assured it will be gone before it enters main space, but it helps to keep tihings in perspective. Giano 08:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

You might already have looked at and rejected them, but are these images any use? The one on the left has lots of silly people walking around, and very overcast, leaden skies. It does seem show different architectural periods, with the tower on the right being very different from the stuff on the left. The picture on the right is much better as a picture, and you can see more of the architectural details. Carcharoth 01:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks they are great, I didn't see those whne I looke on commons, the one on the left I shall definitly use, allthough I may crop it - as it shows a point I ant to make about the wings conccealing the nold Genoan fort. Thanks Giano 07:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Historic buildings
[[Image:Order of the ThistleInsignia.JPG|right|thumb|The Most Ancient and Most Noble [[Order of the Thistle]] - and I think you know what that's for. Wow! (in the Jacobite peerage, naturally) --Docg 23:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks I shall wear it with pride, a prickly thistle - very apt Giano]]

I've just thrown together an initial expansion of Charlotte Stuart, Duchess of Albany. Although, I still need to do a lot of work on it (and the compulsory infobox ;)). But it is generating a lot of redlinks to seemingly important historical buildings (many in Italy) - of course we may have these articles already by other names. Since this is your field, I wondered if I could tempt you to take a look. The only one I think I could take a stab at is the Palazzo Muti and even then. --Docg 21:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine, I'll take a look, although ridding wikipedia od "a classy shade of pink" is curently something of a priority. Giano 21:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There's nothing compulsory about the infobox. --Mcginnly | Natter 21:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The wiki seems so empty without you!
Dearest Giacomo-Vittorio, where are you? We are all distraught, please please please come back to us and bless us with your sunkissed prose! Bishonen | talk 17:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC).


 * Yes please! We are so looking forward to the heady delights of Monegasque architecture. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I miss your notes on my Talkpage, Giano: let's find a subject that needs doing... --Wetman 19:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Never fear Giano is here! - just a bad case of writers block - and I am consoling a loved one during a sudden and rather abrupt bereavement. A life gone - so suddenly - one more little friend will no longer stalk us on our walks to the park. Giano 19:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I trust we are talking about a quadrupedal little friend? My sympathies.

How do you feel about modern architecture? I did Stephen Gardiner (architect) today, if you fancy pitching in, and spun off into Stratton Park, George Dance the Younger and his family. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Damn dogs, you love them so much and they're here for such a short time. --Joopercoopers 00:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Can we be quite clear on this (before any more messages of sympathy arrive!) the dog in question was a furry brute of indiferent breeding who followed my own highly bred hound every morning to the park. That it met its untimely end crossing Kensington High Street in pursuit of my own pet is to be regretted, particularly by my own spaniel, who I am consoling.  Personally, my own early morning walk will be less stressful due to the sad demise of "Edmund" (for that was the name I saw on his collar the one time I managed to apprehend him in one of his gratuitous acts). To his owners (however negligent) I send condolences - but they should be comforted that he died in pursuit of that which he loved most. Giano 20:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

"Get down, Shep!" -- pp John Noakes 21:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think the death of a dear little dog, is anything to joke about ALoan! Giano 22:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I had my suspicions you might be a little eccentric, but the mental image of our esteemed Giano cooing words of condolence to a love sick and bereaved spaniel has moved you into the gloriously eccentric compartment of my minds eye. The Basilica Palladiana (Palazzo della Ragione) lies masterless at the fireside of improvement. --Mcginnly | Natter 13:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Hannah on FAC...?
Giacomo, I keep eyeing your beautiful Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery. It's been in mainspace quite a while now, and it sure looks finished to me (admittedly I wouldn't recognize a gap in a subject like that if it jumped up and bit me). Er, are you planning to put it on FAC? Or too sick of the FA circus..? Bishonen | talk 18:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC).


 * How very kind of you to notice - if that is a discreet offer to nominate - please don't.  The current manias sweeping FA or to be precise FARC criteria have determined me to abandon the process.  You have seen my last FA so while I am still writing to meet my standards - they are mine and nobody else's standards.  In order to ensure they are not FAd I keep a section back and don't do a final polish - which is a pity  - but there you are.  The missing section for Hannah is written and in a word processor file, but it won't see the light of day.  I'm glad you like her, no one has ever written a proper biography of her, and most of the books in which she is mentioned are out of print and most certainly not on-line. So while anyone can finish the page - it is doubtful they will have information to solve the final key - My FA standards demand every known fact be there. It is spiteful of me I know, but having endured the venom of the FARC page - I never want a page of mine there again, while there about ten or so that may be there sooner or later, I see no reason to produce future  fodder for the ever more demanding criteria police. I am currently here  footnoting (as with Hannah) almost every verb for the simple reason when I am long gone from wikipedia there is likely to be movement to delete pages with every verbs not cited - the writing is on the all.   The intellectually demanding page (i.e. written by someone who has to put some serious thought in order to increase Wikipedia's standing in accademia, and also to avoid charges of plagiarism)  is going to be doomed as only pokemon and their ilk will meet the citing demands.


 * So my attitude now is if the zealots of FARC are so clever and knowing let them write their own FAs to their own standards. In the meantime I'm quite enjoying writing the pages on obscure (and little referenced) subjects I enjoy to my own standards. Thanks for the complement though. In return I note, your beautiful and fascinating  this  is almost finished - what are your plans for that?  Do you know the only thing I shall regret mega boast coming - never again will I have the same article on the Front page of three different language wikis in the same month - never mind at least I did it once! No doubt some very clever people will immediatly shoot my view down, but it is my view, and I write to my own standards no one else's. Giano 19:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Bizarre. I've never taken any notice of the FA process, but I had a notion that I'd like to find the time to try to take one of my articles to that standard. But if an article of the quality of that piece wouldn't pass, then I rather think I'll just continue to ignore the process.--Docg 19:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh try it - it's like cheap wine, rough whisky and fast sex - every one should try it once Giano 21:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've had Old Crow and Chateau Elan. Where do I get the third element of the trifecta?  Geogre 21:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would have thought you knew where to find her Giano 22:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised anybody cares to try for FAs, Doc, but many people seem quite eager to. Don't know why. I used to be, but not any more. It's not so much the FARC issues for me, it's that WP:FAC itself has changed. This current sandbox isn't going near FAC after the crap I got last time — I'm still pissed off about it — yes, that shows how touchy I am, and ungrateful to the nice people who supported — it's a gut reaction, I can't help it. I challenged one opposer about the sheer hostility, and he told me that's how you're supposed to talk on FAC nowadays! So-and-so does it, so it's the culture, so it's-not-my-fault-how-I-talk. Well, I don't want to put you off, Doc, FACing an article is probably a process worth going through once, if only to realize that it's not as veneration-worthy as you thought. But I've sure hit the law of diminishing returns. I don't see the temptation in "having" FAs, anyway. As the author, you get told off for "owning" if you revert anybody, and told off (on FARC, if not sooner) for failing to "maintain" if you don't. Nice cleft stick. Geogre and Giano don't FAC their stuff any more. And Paul August doesn't. Giano, I suppose you saw what he said about it ?
 * As for my current sandbox, Giano, no need to be so polite, I see right through you as usual. It's neither beautiful nor almost finished, and I'm probably the only person on this page it's remotely "fascinating" to..! My plans are to make it fit for mainspace and then move it there. It's slow because I need to research the subject a lot, I knew nothing about it. Bishonen | talk 20:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC).


 * I agree with Bishonen and Giano. There is no way that I'm going near FAC anymore.  Oh, I'll write them, if I feel like it, but there isn't a chance that I'm going to put up with the morons at FAC.  "Object footnote citation style not what I use."  "Object prose is hard for me to understand in general."  "Object awful writing but I won't tell you where."  "Object does not comply to British spellings/American spellings."  So, here I sit, able to publish articles in peer reviewed journals, but not FAC, because, with no experience or expertise, they know better from :03 of reading one paragraph.  No, thanks.  I have an article now on FARC.  It has been translated into multiple wiki's, and it's an FA at many of them, but only we have the enlightenment to de-list it for footnotes, because only we have a campsite set up on FAC comprised of people who feel that they can evaluate articles entymological and etymological, all with an incomplete undergraduate reading level.  I don't usually do the elitest, snob thing, but, when it comes to this, I will.  Geogre 21:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear. Would you object if I nominated Ms. Primrose at FAC?

I still intend to take Mary Seacole to FAC when I get the energy. Otherwise, I am happy writing short articles (Eric Janson, Carlo Gatti) to fill redlinks at the moment. -- ALoan (Talk) 01:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * ALoan, watch my lips! I'm done with FAs - I am not interested in meeting other people's daily changing criteria - I am only going to write articles to the best of my ability to my own standards. Getting them through FAC is the easy part, FARC where they are all ultimately doomed to fall is the hard part - as Bishonen says, so rightly, above "As the author, you get told off for "owning" if you revert anybody, and told off (on FARC, if not sooner) for failing to "maintain" if you don't.". The ordeal of trying to explain why Palladian architecture was still good enought to be a FA, and now again seeing Restoration literature dragged through the shit has confirmed my views.  It would have been nice to think that wikipedia could have high quality articles (I refer to the intelectual scholarly ones - not my descriptions of bricks and mortar) and be proud of them, but that is not the case; authors who write such works have more productive things to with their time than defend their perevious works against zelous sniping. If a work is good it is good, if it is bad it is bad, and it is perfectly obvious when a page is bad - and there a plenty of bad pages on the site for these people to concentrate on, perhaps they should go and find a few, and leave those which have already been reviewed for excellence alone. Giano 08:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi I have re uploaded the picture of Horwood House which I took myself. I used to work there in the BT days as a tutor and jolly fine it was. I am new to Wiki so hope I have got this copyright sorted this time. The police are a apin....cheers

Bletchley aprk is a great place to visit. I was brought up in Bletchley and for a time lived just outside the park. As you guessed I worked there with BT. I now live in Colchester. Did you have to travel far to get to Bletchley park?

The final } is that in the copyright of the acual picture? Sorry to be a pain. 2000 miles gosh. By the sound of your name is that Italy?


 * Speaking of which, I see Stromboli is having one of its periodic fits. I trust you are in a suitably volcano-proof bunker? -- ALoan (Talk) 16:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks with all the help on the copyright. Hopefully it is OK now. Sicily wow I have just read the book by Bradley about what happened there in the war. What is a man in Italy doing at Bletchley Park and interested in the man who built Horwood House?
 * Causing mayhem usually! Giano 20:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello; a stickybeak here. &para; ALoan: I now live in Colchester. My sympathies, but you have (or a couple of years ago had) two of the best used bookshops I have encountered anywhere, your own almost ('cause he's propping up the bar in one or other of Wivenhoe's pubs) resident poet, and various other very redeeming features. &para; Definitely not Geogre: "Object does not comply to British spellings/American spellings." Yes, this is one of my pet annoyances. Spellings have traditionally varied: varied less so as time has passed, but varied all the same. Many but by no means all of the variability has long been crystallizing into one US and another British convention. But even with the "dictionaries" of word processors, it hardly formed two monoliths. I'm delighted to read intelligent prose put out by any good US or British publisher according to its "style". I'm happy to adjust my own spelling according to what seem to be the conventions of the article. I'll certainly not comply in polite silence when asked to change virtually every "-ize" into "-ise" (to take one stupid but actual example) just because some peabrained jackbooted self-appointed tyrant of FAC has determined that (i) the article uses British spelling and (ii) British spelling uses "-ise". Grr. -- Hoary 06:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Begging a favour
Re Renaissance Architecture, There has been a whole rash of vandalism since your last revert. Further editors haven't reverted all of it. I can't do it on my present computer bcause I don't have enough memory. Woud you mind fixing it please!

--Amandajm 09:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't see any vandalism Giano 09:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

In agreement
Hey, looks like I agree with you on something. How about that. -- Cyde Weys 16:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You are psychic! I was about to post the same message to you. Well it is certainly a novelty Cyde - we had better both enjoy the experience while it lasts. I don't suppose you would like to......No don't worry, I won't push it! Giano 16:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

This whole situation (not your agreement, although that is pretty disturbing too ;) - the underlying situation) is very troubling. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What is troubling is not that someone has been deceitful - that is going to happen occasionally with 1000s of editors, it is that this is not a wikipedia internal storm (such as other "storms" in which Cyde and I have been involved!) it is the fact that millions will now view wikipedia editors and consequently there work as unreliable. It is going to be capitalised on by Wikipedia's detractors, and most disturbing of all in my view is that nobody in real authority seems to care a damn. The Arbcom should just get together and sling him out of all positions ASAP, not wait for Jimbo - they have the authority, certain members are not slow to bring fast arbcom cases when they feel they have been wronged, now the whole project is at risk through disgrace - they seem to do nothing. If they don't soon so something I shall put myself forward as an extraordinary Arbcom member - my new friend Cyde will second me - I'm sure. Giano 18:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing seemly in any of this - the initial falsehoods (whatever their motivation), the repetition of them, the "apology", or the wide-spread seeming lack of concern at high levels.

I think the comments from Eloquence (and, now I have seen them, from Quadell) on Essjay's talk page got it about right. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Does that mean you will be joining in the crusade to sweep me to power and subsequent glory? Giano 18:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * PS Now I've read what Quaddel has written I don't altogether agree with him. Essjay has done a grave disservice to both the project and the community, he need to return to the ranks and re-earn (if that is possible) the community's trust. Giano 18:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * My input is probably not needed, but I've thought about it and thought about it. I've tried to distill it as much as I could, and this is what I've come up with.  "On the Internet, no one knows you're not Hans Kung, but when you try to cash his paycheck, there may be trouble."  Geogre 03:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Kiarostami FAC
Hi Giano II

In Case you have time: Would you please take a look at Kiarostami FAC? Any comments? Thanks. Sangak  Talk 20:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry not realy my subject, bit it seems to have done very well without me. Giano 09:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Honoré II
Is it possible to find a better portrait of Honoré II? This is tiny, and it's no good trying to display it at a bigger size than it really is. Bishonen | talk 21:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC).
 * No I can't find one, thay are all pretty dreadful of the Grimaldi - obviously not an attractive family - interbreeding I expect. Giano 09:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Comb over
Hey! what are those people doing on my talk page without comb overs - you know they're the future. --Mcginnly | Natter 21:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks McGinnly - I really have no need of such (I'm sure to you) useful information, my own hair is not only luxurient, plentiful and silkient but only yesterday a lady (I think she may have been Swedish) on the underground asked if she could run her fingers through it! Giano 21:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)



Thank you
for this. I'm ashamed to say that I needed that reminder. ElinorD (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Let me add my own thanks for your thoughtful words. Mackensen (talk) 01:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ditto. Thanks for applying common sense to another incident where such a thing has been entirely lacking.  Daniel Bryant  02:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Free houses!
I dunno if we have an article on SketchUp, but it's a program made by Google and 100% free. Download that sucka, and you'll be drarwring in 3 dimentions in no time. It really is pretty dern easy to use. Oh, and it's free. Free is better than nothing left to lose. Geogre 18:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I actually do have something vey similar, but it is som complicated I end up loosing my temper with it and the computer - I will dowmload and try it, though drawing and planning an entire royal palace may not be the easiest start! Do we have an article dog kennel for me to start with  Giano 19:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I might have a partial solution - 1.click on the coords I added to the top right of the article 2.click 'google maps' the first on the list 3.Click 'satelite' top right - that gives a pretty good resolution satelite image from which I can trace the footprint of the building - from that and the existing image I should be able to get at least a basic 'block plan'. Leave it with me I'll sketch it up tomorrow. regards. --Joopercoopers 00:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here's a first stab - let me know if you'd like bigger, different, more labelling - different cropping, different colours etc.etc.etc. --Joopercoopers 03:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Whoa! I thought I was clever for using a second layer in PhotoShop. Geogre 13:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh wow Gee wiz. It's be the best nonfeatured article on wikipedia, thanks so much Mc G, I shall incorporate it properly tomorrow, just had a rather a long and very alcoholic lunch so best not attemtp it now - you're a star! Giano 18:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Prego, would you like anything changing - BTW what is housed in the north wing - do you want a letter for that? - ps. the blue square in the grounds to the rear appears to be the prince's swimming pool. Also the diagonal street running south east leads directly to the cathedral. I can add a 'to the cathedral' sort of note if you'd like, clearly the relationship of the palace to matters clerical and administrative ie. the wider site, is important.--Joopercoopers 22:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Great idea JC as much as poss, is it possisble to make the old defences, walls, All saints tower and serevelle a little more defined? - I'm really thrilled with this, I'm going to have to have a rethink of the layout tomorrow Giano 22:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've emphasised the defensive walls, towers and serevelle and added a few 'to the cathedral......etc.s' The line of the battlements is a bit speculative on my part, never having been there, it's quite hard to work out exactly what's going on from the satellite image, but I think it should be close enough. (PS you might need to press CTRL+F5 to see the new image). regards --Joopercoopers 11:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks that is brilliant, i can see the nwe image on the page itself but not here, I'll clean all the cookies off and start again before I log in next time, that should do the trick. Thanks for all of this, I hope to have time to spend on the page iteself later on today or tonight - sadly earning a living right now. Giano 11:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Nice map. That article is looking better and better every time I look at it! Carcharoth 17:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well if I can finish some Bastards off I may get around to finishing it Giano 17:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey
Dear Giano,

Thank you for the nice words from two months ago regarding my work on the Ohio Wesleyan University page article. I just nominated it in the FAC process, so if you have the time, feel free to provide your opinion and comments regarding the page. Thank you, once again! LaSaltarella 03:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey there!!!
Hi Giano,

I enjoyed our debate today! =) If you ever want to shoot the breeze, you can always send me an email.  Ciao!!!  MetsFan76 00:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Love in
Can I join the love in? I've brought my own stuff. --Joopercoopers 22:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool Man, I didn't know condoms came that big Giano 22:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * No comment. Do you know the urban myth about churchill during the war? During the winter whilst the allies were pushing into germany, the british found if they stretched a condom over the barrels of their rifles they wouldn't jam. The war ministry needed churchills approval for a scheme to provide troops with special gun-sized rubber sheaths - he considered the proposals and approved them subject to the packets carrying 'made in england' on one side and 'Size:Medium' on the other. --Mcginnly | Natter 22:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * How many years have to been waiting for an opportunity to tell that story? Giano 22:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey man, you've just have to put it down to the altitude. --Mcginnly | Natter 23:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What, no invitation? :( El_C 12:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course you can have an invitation - welcome to my party, you have to bring your own stuff though Giano 12:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Free drugs? El_C 12:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * EL C !!!!!! This is a respectable page - I was referring to ice-cream! Please see below. You have deeply shocked me, and I have to say I am little dissapointed in you. Giano 12:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll have some pot glazed iced-cream! El_C 12:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Strawberry ice cream
Hi, Giano. I was very impressed with your efforts to put a stop to the pile up of discussion about Essjay after it was obvious that it had stopped being useful, even though I understand that you, like me, were critical of his role. I've had a look at your article writing, and find it very impressive. So, to thank you, I'm offering you one of my strawberry ice creams. Your name sounds Italian, so you'll probably be pleased to learn that I made it in this machine, which actually was not bought in Italy, but in this store in London. ElinorD (talk) 12:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Gosh! I've never been given an ice cream on wikipedia before, allthough my bird is named Spumoni. You are clever, nice hands too! That is really kind.  I think the pile on was inevitable, but I think one has to temper anger and criticism according to how constructive or productive it can be, and bearing in mind the target of that anger is probably already pretty mad at themselves.  Outrage can only justifiably last so long.  However, such emotions were not wrong and have led to productive and useful debate on Jimbo's page on how best to address thses difficult issues.  Thanks again for the ice-cream.  Giano 12:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

B'stard
I'm not sure I corrected this correctly - perhaps you'd have a look? --Joopercoopers 16:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC) No, I was just fixing what I meant when I got an edit conflict - neber mind these things happen Giano 16:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Giano, I just had to note that I found your edit and edit summary to West Wycombe Park to be rather amusing! I thought it was either a joke or that you had finally "lost it" until I discovered the article on the Bastard brothers. What a truly awful surname! Thanks for unintentionally amusing me. Simple minds find simple pleasures, I guess. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I would never use such an offensive term for even one of the few people I disliked! You should no me better than that Giano 16:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * dah...edit conflict, sorry - butting out quick smart......--Joopercoopers 16:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No no, I'm done now it is all yours. Giano 16:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You did all that in a few hours? Bloody hell. I'd still be typing 'google'. Thanks you so much for that - I'm overwhelmed. You are a star, sir. And now I'm off to try to find out about those bastard clocks ... 86.133.214.44 16:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep me and a few friends - Log in and write a page on the clocks instead - meet interesting people - make new friends - find a wife/husband (or whatever). Giano 16:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Cranks


From the way your were talking, about editors who vandalize or might even threaten someone physically, I wasn't sure if you understood that the word crank in itself has nothing to do with that. A crank is someone with dodgy notions to sell, not a vandal, not a stalker. Sorry if I mistook your words but I'm sure you can understand cuz you started talking about something wholly different. Would you like me to retract my comment from Jimbo's talk page? Gwen Gale 19:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * we obviously have a cultural and national different understanding on the meaning of cranks. I was referring to the type of people which Essjay said he was seeking to avoid by altering his personnae. Obviously the conversation there has taken a whole new turn. Giano 19:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not a crank in any English dialect I've heard of. Did you look at the Wikipedia article about cranks? Here's a dicdef too. A crank is a "screwball" trying to persuade folks to believe "nutty" notions. Gwen Gale 19:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't speak an English dialect. Giano 19:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You speak an English dialect. What is it? Standard American, southern American, southern UK, western Australian, what. Gwen Gale 19:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Idahoan. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hahaha :) Gwen Gale 19:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Some sort of pigeon. Coo. -- ALoan (Talk) 20:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (Nonplussed) Surely Cranks is a restaurant? Bishonen | talk 21:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Not one I've ever been to! Perhaps you were last in london a long time ago? Giano 21:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * and if Morecombe and Wise up there have nothing better to do than make smart ass remarks I suggest they go and write a page! Giano 21:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Good grief - Morecambe and Wise have separate pages - only on wikipedia! I should suggest a merge to Morecambe and Wise. Doh! we have three articles on the subjects--Mcginnly | Natter 01:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It's the way I tell them, justlikethat. A-ha-ha-ha-ha-haaa. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

My reply to your reply
On User Talk:Jimbo Wales you wrote: "Are you seriously sugesting that those who in real life are very high profile, should be banned from editing Wikipedia, merely because they wish to do so quietly, without drawing attention to themselves?"
 * Not at all. If, as we are theoretically musing, they were forced to disclose their identities as a requisite to joining then the decision would be entirely their's whether or not to stay.  Who said anything about banning anyone?  People of high profile make similar decisions every day all the time.PelleSmith 17:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Those that edit without disclosing their name would be prevented from editing under your suggestion this would in effect be a ban. Giano 17:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You are mincing words in a most peculiar way. No person, as at least defined by the law, no legal citizen of any nation lets say would ever be banned.  By your logic we could argue that I would be "banned" from driving on the streets of the United States because I refuse to use my legal name when I try to obtain a drivers license.  Are they banning me?  Or, given the laws governing such matters am I making a choice not to drive?  Yes I see the two sides of this mincing project but I'm very confident in the side I've picked.  Thanks and best.PelleSmith 17:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I came across this by accident. It seems to me that they certainly would be prevented from editing here by that policy, which would be unfortunate. To me it is quibbling about the word "ban" that is engaging in unhelpful semantics. Metamagician3000 14:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I mainly came here because I wanted to congratulate you (i.e. Giano) on your very sensible and humane contributions to the whole debate on the Essjay contretemps and its aftermath. I'm conscious of this, in part, because I was on the opposite side from you in your dust-up with Lar, and - alas - am probably so in the current InShanee pile-up at arbcom. I was reminded when I just saw your name on Lar's talk page. But I do appreciate all the clear-headed, useful things I see you saying around the place. Metamagician3000 14:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it - most people are generally on the opposite side to me - I get used to it. but beware, I am inevitably proved right at the ned of the day! Giano 15:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Take care! Metamagician3000 22:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh I can take care of myself - I'm thinking of agreeing to go on the Arbcom, and sorting all this mess out once and for all! Giano 22:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Dyslexia
Good, sometimes one gets confused by those British vs American spelling differences. :) Garion96 (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Very good article. A downside of the huge size of Wikipedia is that the only reason that I encountered this article was the fact that I was following the trail of some stupid vandal. :( Garion96 (talk) 12:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Britmax re Bastard brothers
Thank you for the message on my talk page. The point was that someone had displayed a sense of humour on the Bastard brothers  talk page and someone else reverted it away for no reason that I could see: it is, as I say, not in the article and these little things do, in my opinion, make editing wiki that much more enjoyable. So I reverted it with what I thought was a self explanatory request to leave it in the talk section. If you are not familiar with the joke a visit to South Park may be profitable.


 * Thank you


 * Britmax 22:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

From Jimbo's talk page
In defense of pretty much all of us, we outnumber the liars by a very large margin, and I for one intend that it should stay that way.

So, in light of students being silly for just using Wikipedia, I think we as editors should act as if Wikipedia is the only source they're using, therefore we should do our utmost to make each article the best it can be. Regards, Carajou 22:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Refreshing
Hey, just wanted to say it was most refreshing to see this - it's infuriating to see people kibitz and nitpick and do nothing else but try to make troublesome situations worse, and even though some users get away with it waaaaaay too much, it's good to know some people can still call them out on it. Milto LOL pia 07:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I doubt some other people will see it quite like that - I have on occasions been more eloquent, but stand by every word of it. Thanks. Giano 08:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * While I'm here, I do actually agree with you about Tony's role in this particular stuff-up, whatever else I think about it. Metamagician3000 14:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Castle
Hi. I see you're doing a monstrous amount of work on this article. Thank you. --Dweller 14:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Slow down on the edits. Not all of them may be to everyones likeing. For example, the motte and bailey picture is used in several places on the internet and wiki and is a useful reference. CJ DUB 23:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem - take over. I have yet to write one single word. I was about to start on the text today. The lead is dreadful and needs a complete re-write. The whole thing needs ordering vast chunk of repetitition removing. Some fact ere either wrong, and many important one's mising. The pictures were of little use and out of context. The Motte and bailey Image:Tapisserie motte maquette.jpg looked like a work of art brought home from infant's school by a less than talented infant.  I've no wish to tread on the architectural team's toes, I'll leave it to them. I shall shortly be having other more pressing commitments on my time.  Giano 07:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I have a more serious problem with that image. It's nonsense. A motte is an artificial construct. The huge boulder outcrops are unhistorical and grossly misleading. CJ DUB - I think you've been a little unfair. Giano has done a huge amount of restructuring work and his efforts shouldn't be derided. Any changes he makes that you're unhappy with can always be discussed at the talk page. It's not that hard to change them if there's consensus. However, the existing article is utterly dreadful and needs someone willing to take out a spade and do the hard work. If Giano's willing, I trust him to do an A1 job. cross-posted to CJ DUB talk page --Dweller 09:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom
So is anything happening about lar's drive to put you on the arbcom? I can understand his enthusiasm, but don't forget we need you down among us, too. Who's going to write the encyclopedia if you disappear "upstairs" to the abstractions of policy? Bishonen | talk 09:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Fred Bauder will. Such simple-minded questions you ask. Giano will see to it once he's ensconced. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh yes I have a plan of delegation already worked out - poor Jimbo he is looking rather tired and strained after all the "recent troubles" I expect he is looking forward to having some of that heavy burden lifted from his tired and weary shoulders by one so capable and caring. In fact I am going to offer him my "Palazzo Splendido" (Cayman Islands) for a nice long recuperation, while I hold the fort and make a few changes here. Giano 19:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dare I ask what the changes might be? Newyorkbrad 19:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Now, now, Brad - I am curently beseiged by the power hungry, no wonder poor dear Jimbo is so tired if this is what it is like. You will have to be patient, but there are just one or two who may benefiet from a haircut. Giano 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Mentmore and Crafton Studs
Re our previous discussions. I did an article on King Tom and used your photo. Did I label it properly? If you can add to the article that would be great. Thanx. Handicapper 14:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Seems we crossed paths today! Handicapper 14:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Castles
Of course, never accused you of being a British partisan, as I am not also an Italian partisan. the problem, according to me, is that most British (or US) users simply forget that this should be an international encyclopedia, so for them is normal that more stress is given on subjects of their countries, as, I guess, most of their textbooks are so. However, I repeat, the content of this encyclopedia should have an international appearance. I don't matter if in the first 5 pages of the castle article Italian castles are absent (I also added Italian pictures 'cause I of course know better my country's castles), but it absolutely not acceptable that out of the first 7 photographs 5 are devoted to English castles, or that nearly ALL examples relate to English castles, and written as if their knowledge was immediate to the reader, as if anybody, with a little effort and car driving time, could jump out of home and give them a glance (I mean, without even specifying that Portchester is in England). Good work. --Attilios 09:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I had yet to write one bloody word. I was setting the page up. To the best of my knowledge the first image was in France! Giano 09:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As it is now, with an zealant editor reverting ALL my edits, the article on Monaco Palace is, frankly, horrendous. There's no care for image placement, size and whatever. Also the presence of photographs of people is silly, and avoided in most articles here. I'm really tired of fighting against people having bad taste here, like Don Quixote and the windmills, and others who have clearly never opened a serious encyclopedia before in their life. I think I will stop working on Wikipedia for a bit. Ciao. --Attilios 16:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Phew - Giano, re. your plans - if you'd like any others sorting let me know! --Joopercoopers 23:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Advices
Ciao! Check some of my edits at Orazio de Ferrari... I was surprised that such an odl contributor here would miss these categories and other details. Good work. --Attilios 12:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Still with us then I see. Your edits - are a credit to you indeed. Always important to add those bith year cats.  I'm unsure why you removed the inline ref - but who am I to query one such as you. Giano 13:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Genius categorisations Attilios! I've restored the inline citation. --Joopercoopers 13:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ashburnham Place
I was moved to fill a redlink (so many lost houses). Any comments or contributions would be welcome. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * And another - Barlaston Hall. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh we ought to do a big thing on the lost country houses, I remember as a child being complainingly dragged to a huge exhibition about them probably in the early 1980s - how much I wish I could see that exhibition now! I think the British must have destroyed as much of their own heritage as Hitler! Will have a look, perhaps we could ar least create a special category for them. Giano 17:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (The exhibition at the V&A was titled "The destruction of the country house", in 1974 — making Giano a fortysomething, as we've always imagined him. Giles Worsley, England's Lost Houses: from the Archives of Country Life (London: Country Life), ca 2003, is the book. Wetman 18:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * OK so thinking about it, as I married in the 80's it may just posibly have been 1974 - but I can still remember that spooky birdsong played over loudspeakers as we walked in - I was a very impressionable child. My mother thought anything British was superior to anything produced by any other culture - including Italian. So puzzle on that one Wetman - where was she from? Giano 18:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And Italian? It's a toss-up between Buenos Aires and Florence. --18:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There was a reprise in 2005/6 - - "In 1955 one house was demolished every five days" - and here are some other interesting links -    Sigh. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I was a bit misleading, actually - both of these houses are still standing in one form or another. The contents of Ashburnham were dispersed in the 1950s, and the building was drastically reduced. A rather sorry core remains.  User:Wetman has added more details to the Ashburnham article (thanks!), but I would also appreciate your input, Giano.


 * Barlaston Hall was undermined and almost demolished in the 1980, but was saved and expensively restored. But I agree, we ought to have a "lost houses" article. If I remember correctly, quite a few were demolished shortly before the listing rules came in. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be a really interesting article - I was always told that the punitive inherritance taxes of the 20th century, put paid to a lot of the aristocracy's country seats (that and deregulated gambling!). I remember reading somewhere that recent planning policies have attempted to encourage the rebirth of the large country house in the UK as evidenced by Ushida Findlay's starfish design for a large house in cheshire rather than the appaling pile the Duke and Duchess of York built for themselves whilst newlyweds. Sunninghill Park--Joopercoopers 18:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I was always told that the army requisitioned houses during the war and handed them back in appauling condition. The new Labour Government then upped the cost of death duties - thousands of country house owners and heirs had been killed - and were all liable to death duties - plus the Government restricted building works - so the houses were neglected - the family paying punishing death duties - (in many cases the owners wer killed in the fighting, and their sons also a year or so later - so they 2 x death duties to pay) servant's had dissapeared after the previous war, and repairs near impossible because of restrictions - guesss what the only alternative was? Giano 19:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The F***ing Fulfords really did look like Custers last stand. My guess re. your lineage - presumably Sicillian father - Mother.....not French.......American?--Joopercoopers 19:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I feel a page coming on - I have ordered Worley's England's Lost Houses (at vasrt expense - the things I do for this encyclopedia) choosing a title will be the difficult part! Giano
 * You might find this article interesting reading 'around the subject' - it touches on recent planning policy, Brideshead Revisited and the idea of new country houses. It should be noted that Grafton Hall remains unbuilt because a client has yet to be found for the 'grand design' and last year Ushida Findlay went bust due to some biggish schemes in the middle east turning turtle. regards --Joopercoopers 12:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that, that is is interesting. I'm not doing too much on this page just yet because I'm waiting for the Worsley Book to arrive. Even then I'm not sure of the direction to take - at the end of the day it has to be encyclopedic and uncritical. The there is the problem of a realistic title to consider. Giano 12:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 20th century demolition of British country houses - is very ungainly but constrains the subject matter quite well. --Joopercoopers 12:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It does! but I don't like it. However, I expect you are right - we don't have to decide for ages yet in the meantime Exploding Houses will do very well. Giano 12:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, some of them were deliberately blown up, of course! However, I doubt "Da house asplode" will meet much approval. How about "Britan's lost country houses (1945-1974)" or "Demolition of British country houses after the Second World War"? -- ALoan (Talk) 14:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Considering my favourite two were blown up in the 1930s, it won't do at all ALoan! Giano 15:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't that rather kill the arguments based on World War II requisitioning / lack of maintenance / hikes in death duties by the 1945 Labour government? -- ALoan (Talk) 16:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No it does not! They were factors which exascapated a situation already in progress, the introduction of income tax at the begining of the century, shortage of servants following the 1st world war and sevaral other reasons which I have yet to think of, but rest assured I shall find them - and an aristocracy that had lost its way somewhat, turning their backs on the values which had upheld their possition for centuries - think A Handful of Dust etc. I have yet to prove this theory but rest assured I shall! Giano 16:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a good thing David Cannadine's The Decline and Fall of the British Aristocracy is now available in paperback. --Wetman 18:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've asked a question from someone who might know whether or not the inclusion of Listed building provisions in the Town and Country Planning Act 1947 was an attempt to halt a pre-war destruction of these houses, or was more a way of preventing the demolition of moderately bomb damaged properties simply because it was cheaper. In any event, the destruction continued. My father bought the stable block and associated servants wings, outhouses and coach house of a modest country house some years ago and researched the history - it was bulldozed into its cellars in the late 1960s reputedly days before its 'listed status' was confirmed, still with portraits hanging on the walls. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Bastards! Giano 16:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, it was not actually illegal to demolish a listed building until the Town and Country Planning Act 1968! Dispersal of the contents is arguably as bad as demolition - for example, the Mentmore Towers sale in 1975.

There is a catalogue for the 1974 V&A exhibition, written by Roy Strong, credited by some as the turning point, and the start of the upswing of the "heritage industry" (although places like Longleat and Chatsworth House had been doing that for ages).

Perhaps also worth mentioning the sale of Easton Neston in 2004 - the family being more important than the house. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's interesting Aloan, I didn't know that Solihull suggest although the original provisions were made in the 1947 act, it wasn't until 1966 that a comprehensive survey was undertaken to establish the 'list' - wonderful! the wheels of bureacracy really were running slow; but then people were eating Whale meat so I suppose there were other priorities.--Mcginnly | Natter 18:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The Mentmore Towers dispersal (Hannah's house co-incidentally) was entirely 102% the result of the James Callaghan government who were offered the collection for 3 million turned it down so the Rosebery's sold it for 10 million - the same government was then forced to buy three or four paintings for almost the same price as they could have brought the whole. Some daft old biddy in charge of heritage Baroness Burke said on behalf of thre government "the collection of continental items assembled by a Jew were not part of the national heritage" they may not have been her exatc words but they are very close.  The nation lost a collection which was more important than the Waddesden Collection which was assembled to rival that of Mentmore.  Waddesdon Manor was actually decorated with the left over 18th century boisseries which were the offcuts from those used at Mentmore. It was a national disgrace.  Easton Neston is far more important than the Heskeths what do you mean? I wrote that page - or at least added a lot to it - anyway it is still very much standing as a fine example of English Baroque.  Woburn Abbey was one of the first to become fully commercial, allthough valuable point here, only after it had been half demolished! This could be a very good page, keeping it NPOV will be the problem, but I'm getting some ideas now, Woburn half demolished, West Wycombe Park's servant's wing demolished - I wnder what percentage are actually untouched even Sandringham House has been drastically reduced in size Giano 18:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was just trying to find Baroness Burke on the internet, now there is a bio I would love to write!!! could not find a thing about her (serves her right) only a true socialist could choose here title in the peerage to be Burke as in Burke's peerage giving about two billion hits - none of which relate to her - because she has no recorded relations! Not surprised I would not want to own her either! (rant over) I did find this though completely endorsing my view No,  it was not written by me Giano 18:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe she was Alma Lillian Birk, Baroness Birk, a minister at the Department of the Environment. According to List of British Jewish politicians, she was Jewish herself - "Four women were among the first ten Jews to be made life peers: Dora Gaitskell, Beatrice Serota, Alma Birk and Beatrice Plummer". The Mentmore fiasco triggered the change of the National Land Fund into the National Heritage Memorial Fund. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Is she still alive? Giano 21:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ODNB says :"Birk [née Wilson], Alma Lillian, Baroness Birk (1917–1996), politician and journalist". There are photographs at the NPG. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's her, allright! Giano 11:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Intimate Relationship page
FYI, I've made corrections to the Intimate relationship page which you first suggested at Talk:Intimate_relationship nearly a year ago. NCdave 04:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks I had forgotten about that, I seem to rememeber I quickly wrote Mistress as a knee-jerk reaction to to Mistress being redirected to Intimate relationship. Gosh a year ago - how time does fly indeed. Giano 16:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hornby Castle, Yorkshire
There were two castles in Hornby in the Lune valley near Lancaster (put the map ref into Streetmap or Multimap to show them) but neither fits the description of a house demolished recently. Castle Stede consists of old earthworks with no building there for centuries. The other castle consists of a 16th century tower with multiple later additions which seems to be very much there - see and. I am not aware of a Hornby castle elsewhere and a quick look at Google has not come up with one. Good luck. Peter I. Vardy 16:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hornby Castle, North Riding of Yorkshire, was a fourteenth and fifteenth-century courtyard castle: C15 work for William, Lord Conyers. Late C14 northwest tower, known as St Quintin's Tower after the medieval family which occupied the castle, was demolished in 1927. see here, with bibliography. Hornby was largely rebuilt by John Carr, responsible for south and east ranges and outbuildings, for the fourth Earl of Holdernesse, in the 1760s. The eventual heir was the Duke of Leeds, who assembled rich early C18 furniture from several houses there, pre-WWI (Percy Macquoid). Most of Hornby was demolished in the 1930s except the south range. (Colvin, 1995). --(Wetman 08:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC))


 * Thanks for that - I see you've done the page! I think I will try and find a better example for a medieveal example -If i use that one the page will be constantly plagued by people helpfully  pointing out that it was not in fact demolished. So if you know of any of which do not have two stones remianing on top of each other that would be good Giano 14:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Their sites and their massive foundations combined to encourage on-site rebuilding, in the form of unfortified manor houses from the fifteenth century, or as great houses, rather than simple, final demolition. This is my prejudiced impression, not having done any purposeful reading directly on-subject, Giano. Sub-themes: castles demolished as punishment; castle structure reused as building material. --Wetman 02:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This one is a problem - as you say they were all altered after defortification so there will be untouched medieval houses demolished - it is just a mater of finding the best example or most unaltered - amd them finding an image - Corfe Castle keeps coming to mind but that was demolished during the civil war - pity as I have some rather good fotos of that - I suppose I couls always lie and say it was demolished by drunken cricket fans rampaging back from watchinging Hampshire playing at home, but even they would have to be very drunk to take that route.  I shall do have to some research.  I also want a Welsh house to even the balance - so a medieval Welsh demolished house would be perfect - with an image  - I found one but the owner of the site with the images has not come back to me - anyway asking people to surrender copyright and go all through that rigmarole is far too stresful - so I shall have to do some more research - there are lots of "Castly" looking houses n Yorkshire and Cumbria - I may find one there - anyway I'm growing a lttle tired of Wikipedia, it eccentricities, eccentrics and the plain mad at the moment and there is a lot going on in RL so it may have to wait. Thanks for the advice Wetman

WP:RFAR
Your comment is excellent, and goes to the root of half of the objections to the case. This is not about your block, that's a completely separate can of worms, and enough heads have rolled over it. When the case is opened, please do take the case off your watchlist. This is not intended to be about Bc's actions of 2006, and bringing them up would only muddy the waters. (Let's see, any other tired cliches I can inject here?) This is not about Kelly Martin, Tony Sidaway, Giano or Geogre. That's been dealt with, rehashed, and the dead horse thoroughly beaten. (Aha, found one!) There are plenty of events in 2007 to worry about. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 21:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That is a matter of opinion, incidentally not mine. Whose head precisely has rolled? Concerning that deplorable incident. Anyhow it maters not, I'm rather tired of wikipedia and its show trials, which become ridiculours affairs of great drama between the hanging judge and his manic sidekick but always fail to address the issues concerned. I will go and amuse myself with something more interesting like have root canal work. Giano 06:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Heads? Heads have rolled? Interesting. First I've heard of it. You must be on the Inside Track. What's that like? Bishonen | talk 21:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC).
 * I think perhaps its a typo - heads lolling - gently to sleep.......zzz --Joopercoopers 21:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * When the case is opened, it will be on a new page, so it won't be on your watchlist to begin with unless you add it (or, depending on your settings, edit the page). Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Betacommand
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Betacommand. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 00:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you Brad - I don't think I'll bother to even watch - but I'm sure I know the outcome. Giano 07:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back Giano. Paul August &#9742; 19:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:GianoSpedaledegli.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:GianoSpedaledegli.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 20:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No I have not - now bugger off and read the text you daft bloody bot! Giano 20:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * LOL! Don't forget the wise old saying (from someone whose name I forget), "foolish is he who directs anger at a fool (ie. a bot)..." :-) Of course, you are not angry, just dumbfounded, annoyed and irritated in equal measure (or something). Carcharoth 11:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Eleonora di Toledo
Hey, could you take a look at the recent history of Eleonora di Toledo, please, and the talkpage, and get in touch with the IP editor? (I told them I'd ask you to.) Bishonen | talk 11:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC).
 * How very kind of you, she was not on my watch list any more, I only do Royalty and titled people if they are very wicked, very promiscuous, very amusing, or built a wonder of the world, Eleanora filled the last two categories, I have just responded on her talk - it would be a shame to make her too dull. Giano 17:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Would James I of England count? I put him up for WP:FAR, and he seems an interesting sort of person. Personal relationships of James I of England was an eye-opener. Carcharoth 11:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope, James I is not in field of interest - nasty old drunk with some other strange habbits which were far from amusing - if people must get drunk then get witty-drunk, morose-drunk and buggering the valets is nasty for everybody, not only the valets. Giano 18:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Architectural elements
Sorry to bring down the tone, but we seem to be missing lots of basic architectural elements. I have made up king post - then found and assimilated king-post - which also deals with queen posts and crown posts. But there is no Dutch gable, no coach house or coachhouse, and no linen fold or linenfold.

O tempura, o teriyaki! -- ALoan (Talk) 17:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you studying Mandarin or something ALoan, you seem to be speaking very odly - there you a "Dutch gable" no there will be no references - I wrote it off the top of my head after a very long day - so go and add....Giano 18:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Leoni & Buckingham Palace
Hi Giano, I'm wondering if you're also "this" Giano? I've come across the archived discussion while I was looking for information about Giacomo Leoni (for the German Wikipedia). "Giano" (you?) has written there that the Buckingham East façade was influenced by Leoni's Lyme Park. Do you know if there's literature about it, or how did you fear about it yourself? The internet seems to distribute it largely as more or less direct takes from Wikipedia... or at least I don't find anything useful there. So maybe you could help me out? Thanks a lot, Ibn Battuta 18:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sadly, yes that is me, new to wikipedia and knowing even less about FAs than I do now, regarding the Buckingham palace and Lyme Park comparison, the Leoni page was written ages ago before we were expected to cite our references in the way we do now - I will have to find the books I used to write that page - which I don't have with me right now - basically Leoni was introducing a type of Italianate architecture a form of Palladianism - which eventually evolved into the 19th century "municipal street architecture" of which Buckingham Palace's early 20th century face-lift is an unremarkable prime example - the obvious comparisons between the palace and Lyme are the central triple arch, double pilasters terminating the centre bay, and most obviously the box like structure over the pediment, which I think at Lyme was a 19th century addition - to replace a cupola - I will find the books next time I am home and ref it. Giano 22:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks a lot, and especially for the details about the influence! When you're talking about the triple arc, you're probably referring to the central arcade at the street level, right? - BTW, according to Lyme Park - Disley, Cheshire (NT), on UK Heritage, the cupola was simply never built because the owner didn't like it; and Wyatt's addition came around 1817... Thanks again, Ibn Battuta 02:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sunnyside Hospital, Christchurch
I thought you might be interested to know that the former Sunnyside Mental Hospital, designed by Benjamin Mountfort and built in 1892, is now being demolished. (Radio New Zealand) I have mixed feelings; on the one hand we're losing a heritage building, on the other it was probably a horrible place for those unfortunate enough to be committed there.- gadfium 06:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It does seem a pity that a country by comparison with Europe and America fairly poor in 19th century architecture can demolish a building like this Image:Sunny Side Asylum.jpg by one of its most eminent architects. One has to though evaluate its possible  further use - in London it would be converted into  luxury apartments or offices. I agree with you  I don't think 19th century mental hospitals were known for their comfort and therapy - more places to tidy these people away off the streets - but that is part of a cultural heritage too - one would knot demolish the Tower of London because some pretty horrible things repeatedly happened in it's basement - or the Alhambra of Caserta because they were built by forced slave labour - all equally horrible if not worse.  It seems though most of Mountfort's work is already demolished and what remains in an administrative wing by John Campbell.  Here is the official assessment of its architectural worth - if there were ever an appeal a decent planning lawyer could nuke that assessment in five minutes - The Council here saving the admin building "Ensure effective ongoing protection of the Administration Building through the Council purchasing the building," and interestingly "There are a number of potential options for future use of the building, ranging from craft studios to a cafeteria, to accommodation. Certainly, its potential role as an important community facility can be promoted."  and yet suddenly here  they have given permission for its demolition - if that were my country's heritage I would want to know why - Designed by Mountfort or Campbell, it is immaterial, it is a rare piece of 19th century Gothic and part of NZs very sparse architectural heritage - as I said a decent planning lawyer could save it on those reports alone. Giano 08:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Sp.?
No, you're wwrong... there's no grrr in "Logrenzo"...I looked it up. and while I must agreee that plans and planned is something of a case of superfluous redundancy, I have to tell you that "appear" has only two Ps. Are you trying to ggett at me orr wot? Let me inform you, that if you have ever beeen in a rainstorm when half the Sahahara Dessert was dumped on Rome, thwen you'd know why most of Ancient Rome was invisible. Wot's more to the point...don't you know anything about the Renaisssance in Russsia? It only needs one litttle parragryph? By the way, what have you done to offend Lady Catherine? Not more baroque toilet humour, I hhope? --Amandajm 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No! wait a minute.... maybe it only has one P... well anyway, it has one or two but it deffinitely doesn't have three.
 * I have no idea what it is you are talking about - do you have some diffs? Giano 14:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Biography infobox
Could you please explain why you feel there shouldn't be an infobox on Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery? Er rab ee 13:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I was surprised to see that page had been nominated here for whatever an "A class" biography is, end even more surprised to see someone obviously more familiar with the A Class biographies than me felt it needed an info-box - It does not. In my opinion info-boxes on biographies appear like thise horrible cards children collect - are they given free with soap powder or something? Whatever - the subject was not a president of the USA, a reigning sovereign, just a woman who happened to be for a short time to be an "It girl" of late Victorian society - there is no justifiable need for an infobox. This subject has been discussed ad-nauseum on Wikipediam and still it won't go away. Giano 15:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Just dropping by to note my complete agreement with Giano on this issue. Infoboxes are widely overused; while there are a few articles on which they are useful (articles about U.S. presidents, countries, stuff like that), there's certainly no need for them on articles like the one under discussion here or on smallish things like Jean Baptiste Perrin, where the infobox is actually longer than the article.  A pox on the silly things! Kelly Martin (talk) 15:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Try this version of Perrin without the infobox. Carcharoth 11:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, first of all: A-class is the next best thing Wikipedia has to offer after Featured Articles. The current example for an A-class article of the Biography project (Linus Pauling) does not meet the criteria for A-class (much to my annoyance, as I have a Ph.D. in quantum chemistry, spent time at Caltech in 1989, and attended a lecture by Pauling, already an icon of the scientific world in his lifetime). Anyway, sorry for digressing, but we needed a new example of what an A-class Biography article should like. The situation in the Biography project has always been that anybody could give an article an A-class rating, which has led to some very sorry excuses for articles getting A-class ratings by their creators. So, I've been searching for an A-class rated article that deserved that honor, and I thought Hannah Primrose was an excellent article, which could well serve as example. As for your (and Kelly Martin's) objections to infoboxes, I'm not sure whether to agree or disagree. I'm quite sure however that in any encyclopedia where anybody can edit, attempts to create uniformity across articles of the same type are very important. If the biography infobox is a means to that end remains to be seen. The (lack of) infobox is however not a severe enough point to deny the Hannah Primrose article (exemplary) A-class status. Er rab ee 21:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think Hannah is a very representative example of a GA, Errabee. It should be an FA, if anything. The reason it's not is that Giano is PO'd with the stuff that happens to FAs and FA writers on FAR/FARC. Being abused for defending your work isn't a happy experience, I guess. Bishonen | talk 10:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
 * Hannah is a stunningly good article, I have to say. My poor little Typical Striped Grass Mouse looks quite pathetic beside it! ElinorD (talk) 12:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What a cute little feller! :-) Stripey like a wild boar piglet. I want one! Bishonen | talk 23:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
 * He is rather cute. But, um, aren't you the owner of a very dangerous reptile? I wouldn't dream of handing one over to you. I'd be afraid you might give it to her! ElinorD (talk) 23:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * ['Zilla hastily rescues cute little typical mouse from Bishonen, who is about to put it in her mid-European meat stew. Reproachfully.] Pet! Not snack! ['Zilla hides mouse in biobox.]   bishzilla    R O A RR!!     01:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Give all the boxes to the 'zilla to play with. I'm sick of people who can't write articles sticking horrible ugly standardised boxes on otherwise decent articles. Such people probably think that is it cool to have a bumper sticker on your car, or keep your CD collection in alphabetical order. We are quite unworthy of them.--Docg 23:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had not thought about it like that, just like those dimwitted, homespun, happy looking people who drive about in fiestas and such like announcing they have "a baby on board" - they only do it so they can park closer to the door at the supermarket. That's my theory anyway Giano 06:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I once, in a moment of weakness, arranged my library alphabetically by author. It looked horrible. Baby on board stickers have generated a lot of urban myths. Hopefully our article doesn't repeat them. Carcharoth 23:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Minor renaming
FYI, User Giano/Villa Medicea di Cafaggiolo was misnamed, putting it in the main article namespace. I've moved it to User:Giano/Villa Medicea di Cafaggiolo (notice the colon) Raul654 23:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you Raul! Giano 07:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Speaking of which, which is less peculier, Gustav Utens or Giusto Utens? --Wetman 00:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Wetman, thanks for the contributions - very welcome, my info was drying up a little! Have a great picture to scan later today to demonstrate the architecture. On the subject of Utens ...I hate to complicate the issue further...but I always knew him as Justus Utens (as he is referred to in "better" Italian books!!!, but all my text books seem to translate him as Gustav! Lets see what google, that well known arbitrator of these matters says:  Giusto 50,000; Gustav 797; Justus 812.  Which is pretty conclusive - Wetman wins not only a pack of crayons for the "April Art Prize" but also the oportunity to write Giusto Utens - seriously there is stacks of his stuff on commons, I'm amazed he is a red link. Giano 07:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The stuff on-line all consists of reproductions of the lunette paintings, which garden historians pore over with jeweller's loupes, and JSTOR articles on the villas themselves (which I can get to, but they don't offer any details on Utens).  Precious little on-line for Justus/Giusto himself. I've made a weak slender stub translating from it:wiki. It will fix a redlink though. --Wetman 07:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That's fine - far better than nothing - a lot better in fact! Giano 10:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Old Bishops Palace, Oslo
Apparently James I of England got married there. Worth an article, or a stub? Carcharoth 10:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Though I see you are busy again. Looks nice. Carcharoth 11:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds more like Bishonenland to me, than my own sunkissed territory - I'm sure you can write it yourself - are you sure he actually attended the wedding there though? Giano 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Apparently so. You are right. I should try and do something myself. How would I begin assessing whether it is notable enough for an article in the first place? Age? Architectural style? Hang on. I've just found an absolutely fascinating document. Good Lord! Look at this: - a translation of contemporary Danish accounts of the wedding!! Excuse me while I pop back to the James/Anne pages. Carcharoth 12:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * if like me you work surrounded by architectural books it is easy, but even they are likely not to have much on that building, so I would just google, but use only the reputable academic referenced sites, not holiday and tourist sites as they tend to lie to make holiday destinations more exiting. Then try and find some old painting or print that is out of copyright or better still pursuade Bishonen or one of the the other Nordics to get on their bike, sled, skis or dog (or whatever is the favoured mode of transport in those parts) and take a picture. Giano 12:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Reindeer at a Gallop. Bishonen | talk 20:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
 * OK. Thanks. Carcharoth 12:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * have you got a link to it, I can't even find a photo Giano 12:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Er. This is the best I can do for now... I'll keep looking. Carcharoth 12:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Er indeed! Is that it? - it doesn't look to be in a very good state of repair, does it? Giano 12:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

LOL! I think I need an archaeological writer, not an architectural one! :-) More seriously, I looked more closely at the contemporary source I quoted above, and the author of that added a footnote. Main text: "Earl George Keith, a Scottish Marischal and ambassador, led her Highness into the old Bishop's Palace". Footnote: "Not of course the present one, which used to be the Dominican Monastery." Anyway, I'm giving up on this, unless an Oslo resident can shed light on it all. Carcharoth 12:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I hate to give up, but it does not look very hopeful, there must be some Norwegian editors here. Giano 12:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, looking at Oslo, it seems that there isn't much history before it was rebuilt after fires in 1624, which is after the time I'm thinking of. Oh well. Looks like they got married in a cow shed in Norway. (that's a joke!) Carcharoth 12:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You could try User:Egil he seems to have the requisite qualifications (he is Norwegian and edited Oslo cathedral) which is about as good as we are going to get. Giano 12:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. He now has two posts waiting for him! Carcharoth 12:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you talking about the building constructed by bishop Nikolas in the 1200s, now under the Oslo Ladegård? Replaced by a Renaissance building in the late 1500s (a new Renaissance building would be ideal for a Stuart royal wedding) and then replaced again by a Baroque building in around 1720? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That might indeed be the one where James and Anne got married, though it is strange they don't mention it if so. I'm also curious now about the contemporary building called "Old Bishop's Palace" in Oslo. As pointed out above, this might be the closest you will get to an idea of where the old place was. Search for "Bishop". Carcharoth 13:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * And there is more. The bishop's name, which I eventually worked out from that document as being a Jens Nilsson, is listed at Oslo Cathedral as being a Bishop of Oslo from 1580-1600, which fits with the dates of their marriage of 1589. So I'm now wondering what the Hallvards Cathedral mentioned at Oslo Cathedral has to do with this Bishop's Palace? Carcharoth 13:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Jens Nilson? - you can't have bishop called Jens Nilson sounds like an olympic skier or porno star Giano 14:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * He has an article on the Norwegian Wikipedia. Which leads to their article on the Oslo Cathedral, but still leading to dead ends, really. And tis source says they married in Kronborg Castle. Hmm. I'm going to stop there until more information emerges. Carcharoth 14:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * False alarm. Kronborg Castle was the proxy marriage in August, before the real marriage later that year. Carcharoth 14:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This is all becoming very complicated - are you sure this page is a good idea? Giano 14:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably not. But I think I've found enough to satisfy me what is going on, even if no page results from all this. Have a look at this Norwegian page, which has references to a "Christen Mules gård" where James and Anne were married (confirmed by this, which says: "On 23rd November the royal couple stood in Christen Mules Gaard, in the great hall"). Now look at the picture on that Norweigian site, and look at the page ALoan provided earlier: . Same place. Only remains to find a reliable source linking "Christen Mules Gaard" to "Oslo Ladegård". More reliable than another wikipedia, anyway. And sadly, no extant Renaissance building. Sorry to have taken up so much of your time, and thanks for helping out (both you and ALoan). Carcharoth 14:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a good start... :-( Carcharoth 14:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * And this truly is the end of it, I promise! Carcharoth 14:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Norwegian sources
Studying Norwegian internet resources I found that up to the middle of the 16th century (i.e. when James I was born) the bishop of Oslo resided at the location where Oslo Ladegård was since located. See also no:Oslo Ladegård. The current Oslo Ladegård is from the 1720s, but there is a room in the basement, called bishop Nikolas' winter hall, which is from the original bishops palace. The original bishops palace was built in the 1200s.

During the reformation (1537?), the power of the bishop diminished. At some time after this (not really sure when) the king in Denmark threw the bishop out of the old palace, whereafter he moved to the Olavs cloister, which after 1537 was no longer used (it was founded in 1239 by Dominicans). The "new" bishops palace (or building) was in fact built in the 1880s at the location of the cloister ruins.

James and Anne were married at the old Bishops Palace in 1589. -- Egil 20:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Egil, that is terrific. Carcharoth will be able to start on his new page, his first easy venture into architecture, in the morning - I immagine he has his nose in his Norwegian phrase book as we speak. Thanks a lot your time will not have been wasted. Giano 21:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * "My hovercraft is full of bishops"! Bishonen | talk 01:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC).
 * As Giano said, thanks! That really makes things a lot clearer. However, I do still have a few more questions... I've replied at your talk page. Carcharoth 09:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Templates or whatever they are called
In the time it took you to make this edit would it not have been just as quick to correct the link yourself, rather than slap an insightly template or whatever they are called on a perfectly good page? Giano 18:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I was not sure and now you fixed it so it worked as planned. Thank you. Rettetast 18:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If you do not understand simple English - should you be slapping templates here there and everywhere? Giano 18:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No need to be rude. I see that could have solved the issue myself but since it was an FA it would have been fare worse if i corrected the link to a wrong location. Peerage of Scotland. Have a nice day. Rettetast 18:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

QVJIN
The unsightly red link was why I started it, but I haven't got very far. I've got a long weekend coming up, but I need to hang around as I'm on call. So I should have plenty of time to get a Queen Victoria Jubilee Institute for Nurses stub done. Cheers! Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Dashwoods
Giano,

I'm sorry to trouble you, but I'm wondering if you can clarify for me something about the Dashwoods of West Wycombe Park, as you seem to have access to Tim Knox's book about the house. Did the estate pass from Sir George (5th Baronet) to his brother Sir John (6th Baronet) for the remaining year of Sir John's life, and then to their nephew Sir Edwin, 7th Baronet (as the article now reads), or directly from Sir George to Edwin? The 11th Baronet's history of the family suggests the latter, but he gets his genealogy all muddled up in that particular generation, so I'm inclined to believe that the estate and the baronetcy were inherited together. If you could confirm that in Knox, it would put my mind very much at ease.

Yours, Choess 05:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem I am reading it now as I type: The family tree on the back cover states: George Henry 5th Baronet died in 1862 - he has his name in capitals denoting ownership of the house, he is succeeded by his brother Sir John Richard 6th baronet who also has his name in capitals denoting ownership - the 6th baronet is succeeded by his nephew Edwin Hare Dashwood in 1863 again in capitals - so from the book it appears all three owned the house. Now I'll look in the Dashwood's at west Wycombe section. Page 58; aha! "The 5th Baronet died in 1862 leaving his widow a life tennancy of the house, she lived on there for another 27 years" then it goes on the 6th Batonet never lived at WWP but died the following year - so it seems he owned the house, but his sister-in-law was in occupation as a tennant. It later states on the same page (58) the 7th baronet inheirited in 1863 but could not live at WWP because his aunt was in occupation, when the 7th baronet died in 1882 the old lady was still there. Page 59,"perhaps despairing of ever ejecting Lady Elizabeth from WWPhe returned to New Zealand...in 1889 came news of Lady Elizabeth's death and he returned to England to take possession". It appears they all owned the house, but had to wait for the 5th Baronet's widow to die. She was incidentally formerly Elizabeth Broadhead who married the 5th baronet in 1823.  I had better check now and make sure that ties in with what I wrote at WWP!. Regards Giano 10:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Comedy gold!
I saw this bit you said at ANI: "As is becoming all too frequent I expect Cyde is correct"... LOL! That is classic comedy. Ahem. We now return you to your scheduled service. Carcharoth 14:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Identity theft? -- ALoan (Talk) 16:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That's a really bad picture of Kelly... :-) Carcharoth 17:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you Laurel and Hardy, I'm not sure what the inference is there from either of you but I advise you both to remember this page is watched by people just waiting to issue legitmate bans....and worse! So proceed here with caution. Giano 18:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Tsarevna vs. Tsesarevna
For example, this photograph from 1870 is titled "Tsesarevna Maria Feodorovna with Her Son Nicky". -- Ghirla -трёп-  10:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

F2K has left the building
Email me instead. -- Roleplayer 21:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ca' Foscari.gif
When I tagged it, there was no indication you took the photograph and thus no indication who gave permission to release as GFDL. You edit of the summary cleared up the issue nicely. -Thanks Nv8200p talk 23:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Julie d'Aubigny
I had known of the lady for decades, at second-hand, but the chevalier de Mailly recently introduced us. I think she is a lady for your galleria delle donne, Giano. Her Wikipedia page is dreadfully tame and limping. It needs to be tuned up to concert pitch. --Wetman 04:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * "Avoid women wealding weapons" - if that is not an old proverb somewhere n the world, it should be. Giano 11:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Bastard brothers
Just thought you might like to know I've added a small amount of info and a pic to your page. Jasper33 19:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm delighted to see the page further expanded and with such useful information. It is not "my page" though but thank you for the courtesy of telling me and referring to it as such. However, if you check the history you will see others helped ather the information there so it is nice to have another editor contributing to it. Giano 20:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Never was very good at expressing myself clearly. Hmm, perhaps I shouldn't be editing ... By 'your page' I meant 'the article that you started'. Anyway, I've bunged a bit more in, and am still kicking myself for not taking my camera with me yesterday when I visited the Mezzanine Room. Jasper33 10:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, and I'm kicking you too for not taking a camera! Giano 12:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ouch! I'll take it next year, promise. 'Ornately decorated' ain't the half of it - it looked like the plasterwork had been done by someone on some mind-expanding drug, quite overpowering in such a small room. Plus each panel of the two-panelled doors had different carved decorations (presumably to serve as a 3D pattern book?) adding to the general quease. I like my Georgian architecture plain and simple. Jasper33 12:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The above person is probably English! They never bave taken to or appreciated the Baroque. Giano 12:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

You got me bang to rights, guv'nor. Jasper33 12:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Beacause the very best English Baoque is hidden and unknown! Giano 13:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Still too twiddly-diddly for me. Going back a few centuries, this is more my kind of place. Sigh. Jasper33 13:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/John Alves Arbuthnot
and Alexander George Arbuthnot etc. I don't disagree. My problem is that if I add stuff I get accused of WP:COI or WP:ATT (because it will probably also be on one of my sites) and is likely to be nominated for fact nn or afd by the Irish republican cabal who seem to be attacking articles I create or amend. It is less trouble to hoist my own articles on my own pages. One of my reasons for putting these pages on wiki is to gather further data from other people - ONIH is 100% wrong in suggesting I am creating a WP:WG. - Kittybrewster  (talk) 11:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry I'm not au fait with half your abbreviations such as WP:COI or WP:ATT neither am I aware of your problems, sorry as I am to hear about them. I'm afraid, I'm a long way from being Irish - either republican or whatever the opposite is. I trust you did note I voted "keep" albeit not very glowingly.


 * I comment on the page as a wikipedia biography. As a Wikipedia biography it is in my opinion very limited. I have not looked at all the Arbuthnot pages but the ones I have seem do seem very limited and hurried, for instance I read the one about the Duke of Wellington's "Mrs Arbuthnot" that could be considerably expanded from just reading a couple of Wellington biographies or even an hour's internet research.  My point is that even someone disinterested in the subject has heard of her yet you have still provided limited information.  It seems to me you have created the category at the expense of the pages.  Were all these pages created "to blue" red links of one great featured article I would commend you, but they were not. I  think you should slow down a little and add some more content.   I do wonder if you would not have more success expanding them if you posted them to a family history site rather than Wikipedia.   However, I shouldn't worry doubtless others will disagree with me, and you have broken no Wiki-rules by creating all these stubs so it doesn't really matter much. Giano 11:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, I agree. I was hoping others would expand them. As you say, it would be constructive and not difficult. - Kittybrewster  (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I have written Wikipedia biographies myself, and am delighted when others expand them, but I generally find it (when possible) beneficial to give prospective editors a sound foundation to work on first by adding all the information known to me. Quality not quantity! Giano 12:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Those wacky Arbuthnots...
Hi Giano. Saw your comment on the AfD Articles_for_deletion/John_Alves_Arbuthnot -- so doesn't that mean you can change your vote to a delete? :)     BTW, as a newcomer I recently asked whether anybody in wikipedia gets clout not merely by admin tasks but by good writing. Your name immediately came up, and I've enjoyed looking at some of your work. Take care. HG 14:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Did it? How amazing where? No I don't want to change to delete because because the wretched man is just notable - he founded an existing bank, that bank it today very old and established - so he can have his name here as far as I'm concerned. Giano 15:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, your name came up when I asked some q's in IRC, I think it was #wikipedia boot camp. (Didn't log it, as I gather is policy.) I find it somewhat disheartening that the hierarchy is so oriented to admin, anti-vandalism, and squabbles. (And useful but sometimes drawn out mediations.) Why aren't there senior editors to help improve our writing/content? I notice that Citzendium (sp?) is separating the admin from editorial leaders. Maybe for each project/area we should list the top editors and article designers. Ciao, HG 15:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I can imagine my name would pop up quite quickly on IRC. I hope you have a very long and happy time here. I find if one does not take the more vocal admins too seriously and just gets on and does one's own thing it works quite well here too. Good luck and happy editing Giano 15:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up about the accidental clue to my identity, now purged. Please do not post my personal information again, else I'll be back. HG 18:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You don't scare me, I can lift 25Kg. So as we say in the old country "Fuck you, asshole"  except of course we say it in Italian. Giano 18:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * lol, or as we say said in the old country, gai feifen ahfen yam! Except we said it in High German. HG 18:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well then I suggest you extract your finger from your yam and go write a page! Giano 18:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I too have noted your comments, but why isn't anyone able to address the real problem here: the all too obvious and deliberate stalking and AfDing of articles with the surname of Arbuthnot by the same people? The notability issue is just an excuse. David Lauder 20:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you feel that is the problem, then discuss it in the appropriate place not on my page. Thank you Giano 20:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies. David Lauder 20:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Opinion wanted
You seem like an editor who's been around a bit. I've been doing some work on Real Irish Republican Army (looked like this before I started). Do you think it's up to a good enough standard to take it to Good Article review? Thanks.  One Night In Hackney 303 07:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not realy up to speed with the requirements for the wiki-competative writing competitions, but it does seem to have a forest of foot-notes which they will love. Personally I like a longer lead and few pictures to look at, and it may be a little short, also it seems to end a little abruptly. Are all the facts correct? - I though they had decided not to  use Physical force Irish republicanism, but I don't really follow the subject in any great depth beyond what is in the newspapers. Nominate it, as they will give you the advice as to the criteria they require.  It is seems to be an informative page though and well written. Giano 07:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

It's difficult to know what else to put in the lead, except possibly the Omagh bombing as that's what they are most notorious for. Pictures are problematic, as you can imagine there's not many pictures of the group in action. Any that I could find would probably be fair use simply because free ones are impossible to create. There's an Agentinian editor who's found plenty of photos for PIRA articles who I've asked to see what he can find, hopefully he'll come through. The PIRA have stopped using physical force Irish republicanism, but the RIRA reject that as a betrayal of republican principles, so they are carrying on regardless. Thanks.  One Night In Hackney 303 07:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've hopefully fixed the rather abrupt end to the history section anyway.  One Night In Hackney 303 07:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Sir Evelyn Delves Broughton, Bt
Please can you tell me authoritatively with a citation the value of his estate c.1994? - Kittybrewster  (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I know nothing about the man. Far from my subject Giano 18:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * One of the broadsheets may have reported it. Is this sort of information available from the probate registry?  But you will need to do your own research, I am afraid. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah Aloan! How nice to se you, I did see while perusing my Times this morning that that funy lady with the hat who drank weed killer was his grand-daughter - is that any use? Giano 11:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Daughter. That is where the dubious claim is made. - Kittybrewster  (talk) 12:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I know that you like obituaries ALoan but I hope this, from her page, is nothing to do with you "...and his life partner,..." - what pray is a life-partner? I'm not sure if that is an example of political correctness of just middle class naffness - whatever it is it is quite horrible! Giano 11:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, how interesting (well, in a morbid kind of way). She sounded like a very interesting person - I had not realised that she was related to this baronet. I tend to steer clear of people who are likely to get done anyway (like Lord Weatherill, for example).

I guess a "life partner" is what we would until relatively recently have called a common-law spouse. I just did a former High Court judge with similar sensitivity ("...his [male] partner for 38 years..."). Until very recently, we would have had to read between the lines, from his "close relationship" with his mother and that wonderfully succinct paragraph - "He never married." -- ALoan (Talk) 12:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This chap was her father, by the way - her paternal grand-father was Sir Jock Delves Broughton, Bt., who committed suicide the year after he was acquitted for the murder of Josslyn Hay, 22nd Earl of Erroll. Her husband's father also committed suicide, it seems. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you ALoan, I do not concern myself with the doings of those on the lowest rung of the British title system. Yes I saw he drank weed-killer too, they must have a very careless gardener to keep leaving all this stuff lying arownd unlocked. He is the one I blame! I saw white mischief - I liked the scene where whatsername pulls back the curtains sees the sun shining and says "another lovely fucking day" and then blows her brains out. I experienced very similar emotions once on a photographic safari in Kenya after being trapped in a landrover with the same British people, one of whom was a baronet, for a week. Giano 12:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Jack's page is pretty terrible, actually - I may do him anyway. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes very true Aloan - but actually only Swans have life partners, in my experience that is the seldom the case with people these days - anyway what is wrong with.........no let's not go there you go and see to Jack. Giano 12:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Nothing wrong at all, as far as I am concerned. Live long and be happy.  It is nice to see such matters in the open, in so far as the people concered want these things to be open - the way that Lord Browne has been treated, for example, makes me very sad (although lying in court is never a smart idea). -- ALoan (Talk) 12:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Cheer up
Thank you - the only person in need arownd here is me - in need of a drink! Giano 09:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Judging by your edit to Caitríona Ruane you've had enough to drink ;)  One Night In Hackney 303 12:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

My edits
Do you have a problem?--Counter-revolutionary 14:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you are going to very shortly. Giano 14:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why? I wondered why you went through numerous articles I created that's all. --Counter-revolutionary 14:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was tagging then for references. I did leave an edit summary. Giano 14:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I know, just wondered why you chose mine. No matter.  --Counter-revolutionary 14:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Natural progression from what I was looking at before. Giano 14:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Image:2LORD-ROSEBERY.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:2LORD-ROSEBERY.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Madmedea 21:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The copyright is quite clear, it is mass produced cigar box lable dated 1890. The licensing tag is also quite clear as it always has been. Thank you. Giano 06:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I never disputed the copyright, only the absence of a source. Although there was a heated debate on this last night I think it is still clear that all images should have sources to add verifiability. We just need a less arsey template to notify users with. Madmedea 14:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I am afraid it is impossible to tell you tha name of, a probably, underpaid anonymous artist in Havannah who painted the mass produced label for a box of cigars in 1890. The only thing certain is that the copyright has expired. Giano 14:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I still don't understand why you think a source is necessary for an image like this, which is clearly out of copyright.

If you "never" disputed the copyright, why are you adding brassy templates that say "the copyright status is unclear" (no it is not) and "you will need to specify the owner of the copyright" (no he will not as it is clearly out of copyright) and "please add a proper copyright licensing tag" (already has one) and then a embolded threat to delete the image if Giano does not comply with your unreasonable demands for extra shrubberies -- ALoan (Talk) 00:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Palladian architecture
OK. Thanks for the kind explanation. --MichaelMaggs 05:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete, delete, delete
You seem to have got the hang of this deletion business, I see. A potential new career as a deletionist, perhaps? I always thought that was User:Geogre's department, but you seem well suited to the role so far. -- ALoan (Talk) 22:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Rules
Without implying a reference to anyone or any specific remarks which may or may not have been made by anyone now or previously alive or to any specific event which may or may not have recently occurred.......

I am not in favor of automation which supersedes human thought or overrides human action. Nuclear weapons require two keys and two separate individuals to launch for a good reason.

Humanity sets itself apart because, in theory, it is capable of independent thought and self awareness. Computers and automation are only as good as the collective which programs them.

Nuff said.

Peace in God. -john Lsi john 20:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm quite sure we are indeed all peaceful within God. Thank you for sharing that with me. Giano 20:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, I hope you are not one of those manic beaming people who insists on giving everyone a hug during the Peace? -- ALoan (Talk) 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. T'was intended to be agreement. Without placing judgment on the quality of the decision, I have a disdain for automated processes which make contextual decisions in lieu of humans. ;) Lsi john 20:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * So do I! Praise the Lord! Giano 20:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * and ... -- ALoan (Talk) 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The Lord! - indeed "Our Lord" is not a joking matter, ALoan - please do not make silly comments because one day you will get to the golden gates and say "please let me in" and I will have been there a few days already and be brightly arrayed (having arranged several masses for my soul before departure) and will be in charge of entry and then quite a few Wikipedians will be saying - "Oh why was I not nicer to dear good Giano II when I had the chance. Giano 20:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Did I make a joke? (Have you seen the Rowan Atkinson sketch?) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Small improvements still possible with the HA article?
Hello Giano. I see that a lot of weight is being placed on the Moncrieff article, which talks about Harriet Arbuthnot serving as the Duke of Wellington's social secretary at Number 10 Downing St. I wonder if this may not be true. (It sounds like Moncrieff might not be up with the latest academic findings, or know what is said in the various letters and diaries). Another area of improvement might be adding page numbers to some of the notes. Is it reasonable to try getting into this if it's already at FAC, or should I postpone this kind of thing till later? Thanks, EdJohnston 21:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There should be page numbers where possible. Giano
 * There are page numbers where aplicable. Giano 21:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Regarding Moncrieff maybe he is aware of the latest finding maybe he is not, but he has published elsewhere from wikipedia - as far as I now he is not a wikipedia editor so he is a legitimately citable source - to question his work would be own research, that is a hard fact of wikipedia life. Having read over the last few days an immense amount on the wretched woman I think the role she assumed was that akin to a modern social secretary but a very controlling one - it is a pity we cannot write our own conclusions because I think she was not his mistress but one of those irritating women who like to be "in the know" and more importantly seen to be "in the know". Her father died when she was young, needing a father figure she married an old man - and cultivated old men - she felt safe and unthreatened in their company, which suggests it was not sex she was after - Wellington would countenance no interference in serious matters of state but liked to have an attractive woman on his arm who not only organized his social life but saw off the unwelcome attentions of other women - in return she had the fame and glamour of being his companion - and a certain fame from being a person known to be "in the know" and speculated upon. I think she loved the attention and her husband was probably a complete bore - so concluding I don't think Moncrieff was wrong to describe her so. Giano 21:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * In the FA review, you and Dahn had a difference of opinion about certain sentences. Do you mind if I rewrite the sentences in question? EdJohnston 02:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It's the encyclopedia anyone can edit - so please do anything you may feel will improve the page but be careful becuase it is our job here to draw logical conclusions and summarise facts in rather the way a judge has for a jury who may be tempted to form their own wrong opinions. To draw obvious conclusions from cited facts is correct otherwise we would not need to write the page - just give the reader a list of internet sites and page numbers and senf them off on theor own to find out. Giano 06:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Pallant House Gallery
This might be more of a Wetman thing than a you thing, but this is what happens when you put a significant gallery of modern British art inside a Queen Anne townhouse in Chichester, and then bolt a modern brick block to one side (the architect designed the new British Library). -- ALoan (Talk) 10:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't now much about procincial British art galleried - my knowledge of Britain is confined to a corridor from London to the M25, M4 and A303. Sorry. Anyhow I'm about to start a new FAC with Bishonen. Giano 10:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * But there is a substantial Queen Anne townhouse! With ostriches and everything! -- ALoan (Talk) 10:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ALoan, England is full of Queen Anne houses with or without Ostriches. I do not do Sussex - I have never been there. As Amandajn or whaever her name is she like that sort of thing. Giano 10:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * And what is more ALoan I am in a filthy mood today so best not ask me to be nice, in fact I'm not nice today - I'm totally pissed off. Giano 10:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The edit of yours that you just cited appears to me a good summary of the problem with those articles. EdJohnston 15:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

"Bickering"
You are the first person I have seen blocked "for bickering" on a discussion page... Meanwhile, another user tells people to "get off their behinds", calls their comments "rubbish", indicates that an FAC contribution is an "abomination", and engages you in conversation telling people that "as usual, you're talking absurd". Yes, the FAC process is really going places... Dahn 08:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Gosh I had never seen that - well spotted :-). I'm often banned for my views and opinions, it's an occupational hazzard. I'm only testing the water at FAC to see if it has changed since I was last there - seems it's the same folk who inhabit FARC so vocally to. Nevr mind. Giano 08:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hm. I've looked through the (small) window of evidence on your block log, and, based on that, it seems to me that you have been systematically blocked over vague and interpretable issues. Nothing of what I have seen there would have called for a block (some editors who have called me and other all sorts of names still roam free on wiki, and the worst "offense" I have seen your history is telling someone that you do not expect him/her to understand a certain concept - which is not even particularly rude). Weird indeed. You have my sympathy, if that helps you in any way. Dahn 09:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the sympathy, I can well immagine several editors reading the above through gritted teeth, if not throwing something throught their screens. It is very sad truth that as the avenging angel of truth and a Nemisis I have been grossly misunderstood on wikipedia. I'm sure my reward will be in heaven, where quite a few would probably quite like to see me! I am indeed a saint on earth. Giano 11:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * LOL! You should take up a career as a stand-up comedian, Giano! :-) Carcharoth 11:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Spam filter running amok ==

Good morning sir, check out the above link for a reason why you keep getting that spam message when you try to edit, it seams like there's a problem with the spam filter. I'm no expert so take a look. All the best,  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  11:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you it was a very worrying and stressful moment for me. Giano 11:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't quite know how you pulled through :-p  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  11:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh I'm like that gritty, resiliant, battling on against the odds for the greater good of wikipedia. Giano 11:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

See here
It's quite straightforward when you know how ;)  One Night In Hackney 303 21:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you 1NIH I have great experience in the subject! Giano 21:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I know, the Arbuthnotnotables are falling like dominoes!  One Night In Hackney 303 21:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ridiculous?
How in heck am I being ridiculous? I was only trying to help list this AfD properly for you. I really think that you should assume good faith, and please don't fret about edit conflicts. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 21:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was in the middle of nominating when you decided to take it upon yourself to complete the operation, then leave odd messages in the comment section announcing you had done so, when in fact you had fixed the template incorrectly. Please allow people sufficient time to complete a nomination before deciding to help out, and then reposting your pointless message. Giano 21:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies if I offended you. I didn't realize you were still in the middle of the process -- but please, don't take it so personally. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 21:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Conflicting someone nominating a page with "AfD was improperly listed; I corrected it" is not helpful especially when you had not corrected it, and even if you had boasting about it on the comment page is not the place to do it. It is not possible to carry out the complete nomination process in les than three minutes, in future I sugget you give people at least ten minutes to get to grips with the system before bounding in like an over-hyped labrador puppy retrieving its first pheasant. You have not offended me, and I have not taken anything personally.  Giano 21:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ex pede Herculem
Giano, anything you might add? --Wetman 05:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Have I not seen that at in real life at Chatsworth House Giano 06:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes you have you lucky dog. No, wait: this one is in Zurich. But is it not the funniest neoclassical sheet? --Wetman 07:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * There is an image here And the cascade, and the Emperor fountain, and the violin trompe l'oeil, and the remains of the conservatory, and ...


 * Bess of Hardwick, what a star. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Who is the star, me or Bess of Hardwick? - when one puts one's foot in it as often as I do, beleive me one never forgets a foot - Glad to be of help, is that the lost foot refound then? - Do I get to claim a reward? - any humble sum would be welcome. Giano 17:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Good grief, do you mean to say that could be the foot Fuseli was drawing? I'd thought it was all in his over-heated brain... though there is that goggling head of Constantine...--Wetman 17:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, I am sure Constantine would have found the search engine most useful. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Rockfleet Castle
Make ya wonder how much else is made up!--Vintagekits 17:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You are a very wicked man - go away! Giano 17:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, he's not joking
It would have been nice to think that Andrew Kliman would have taken your words to heart on the talk page of WP:SHUN. I'm afraid you might never have had to deal with an editor such as he. In any event, he is defiant and unrepentant. That means that I can look forward to continued bullying and aggression - thereby suggesting the limitations of using shunning as a tactic. Watchdog07 23:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This comment is a blatant violation of WP:BLP--the phrase "bullying and aggression" implies intent, and thereby attacks a living person (me). I ask that Giano remove it immediately.  I realize that it isn't your comment, Giano, but I would prefer not to mess with your talk page, even though, since it is a WP:BLP violation, WP policy allows me to remove it.


 * Please also see some addition material on shunning as a form of abuse that I discuss on the WP:SHUN talk page.


 * justice-thunders-condemnation 03:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's why you call everything you don't like a "BLP violation", however far-fetched? Because if it was one, you would be entitled to remove it? You might want to review WP:LAWYER. I caution you against touching any posts on this or other talkpages under such a flimsy pretext. Blanking or altering other people's comments on talkpages, other than your own user talk, is considered vandalism. Bishonen | talk 11:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC).

Oh, no, you don't get to interline your comments in my post so nobody can make sense of what I said. Removing your comments and putting them below. Don't do that again, it's both rude and disruptive. Bishonen | talk 22:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC).


 * My dearest Bishonen,


 * You seem to suggest that my charges that Watchdog07 engages in WP:BLP violations is "far-fetched." But unfortunately you have provided no argument or evidence.  Why then should I agree with your characterization?
 * I have. Like WP:SHUN, it is only an essay, not a policy, nor even a guideline.
 * Unfortunately, like your comment above about "far-fetched," your "flimsy prextext" statement is accompanied by no argument or evidence. Why then should I agree with your characterization?
 * Unfortunately, my friend, what you say here is not correct when it comes to violations of WP:BLP, which IS a policy.
 * I would like to remind everyone to engage in civil behavior.  Thank you very much in advance.
 * justice-thunders-condemnation 19:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Excuse me? - are you talking to me? - or just the world in general? If it is me you are talking to, then please gather up your comments and bugger off elsewhere. Thank you Giano 20:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

the hated infoboxes
I'm losing patience with them. Any chance of forming a lobby group to reign in these superificial lunatics? Tony 07:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Tony - have you seen User:Geogre/Templates? He has been complaining about the procrustean demand for all articles to be squeezed into ill-fitting infoboxes for ages.  Perhaps the most prominent offender has been to TfD at least twice, most recently in January 2006.


 * I can see the attraction of a consistent format to set out the most important and uncontroversial lower-common-denominator-type information for a given kind of article. However, you would expect that kind of information to appear in the lead section already. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Tony, another notable anti-box lobbyist for you is Doc glasgow. And you're into composers, check out this baby from Geogre's talkpage, offered up by Folantin. Fortunately a historical version. Bishonen | talk 10:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC).


 * Fortunately indeed. Let them (boxes) burn in hell. I'm so tired of trying to explain to people that Wikipedia is not consistent and that it's not expected to be (WP:POINT). After my return to English Wikipedia, I was flabbergasted to find all the articles about World Heritage Sites "prettified" by addition of unwieldy and uninformative infoboxes. They were thrown into stubs without any regard for their size or potential image jams, as normally happens with infoboxes. Now they tell me that I can't remove them because they "have always been there". Those people don't care about facts, layout or presentation, their true idol is Wikipedia's imaginary consistency. --Ghirla-трёп- 11:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That actually looks like an OK infobox. It doesn't distort things too badly. Once the article has been expanded and the stub templates removed, it will look OK. I don't like the "a" and "b" superscripts, as they distract from the information being displayed. Those should, IMO, be HTML comments to tell editors to only put the official names and designations in those parameters. The references can then be put in the article proper. Carcharoth 12:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've also written on infoboxes, but haven't organised stuff into an essay yet. The following repeats what I've said elsewhere, but my thoughts do seem to be coming together coherently now. In my opinion, they should be nothing more or less than a tabular summary of important and easily summarised points in the article - something to be scanned (similar to a tabular form of the lead section, but slightly different), while those wanting to read the article can do that and ignore the infobox. If a point is not easily summarised and is better treated by a paragraph or two, leave that point out of the infobox and refer the reader to the article or use a footnote. Also, infoboxes should only be used on articles that have enough points to be easily summarised. Short articles can be overwhelmed by infoboxes and if reading the article takes only a little more time than scanning an infobox, then the infobox should be removed and only restored if the article gets bigger. Also, infoboxes should be designed to be as specific as possible and not used generically across broad topics. Finally, infoboxes can be designed to contain numerical and similar data, but if this starts to overwhelm the infobox, then a databox should be placed further down the article in a relevant section, and linked from the main infobox. Infoboxes are difficult to do well, and easy to do badly. Carcharoth 11:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think they are horrible. They look like pokemon cards. All information contained within them should be in the first three lines of the lead. They are only advocated by the type of people who use restaurants where the menus have pictures of the food on them. When they appear on a page where I have been the principle editor I revert them - depending on my mood I sometimes explain why. If people want them on pages they have created that is their choice but no way should they be forced upon others.  I hesitate to tell others what they can or cannot do so long as the same courtesy is extended to me. Giano 12:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I went looking. I had forgotten how bad some of them are. Look at World War I. A clunking great list of commanders. If someone wants to make a list of WWI commanders, that would be great, but why shove them in an infobox where you can't explain what is happening. And look at the clunking great paragraphs of text trying to summarise the cause, results and so on. Absolutely silly. Infoboxes need to be kept short and to the point. Sober information (data cards), not triva (Pokemon cards). Simple data, not grand conclusions. Ooh. I rather like that! :-) Carcharoth 13:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't forget that there have been scores of lame edit wars about the "outcome" of any given battle, whether the victory was "qualified", "tactical", or "partial", etc. If we did not have battleboxes, people would have nothing to fuzz about. They would just read the article and decide for themselves. The battlebox if finely tuned: the problem is not so much the layout as the principle. They are all evil. --Ghirla-трёп- 13:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I quite like the World Heritage Site ones, actually. Short and to the point, full of objective and uncontroversial information of the lowest-common-denominator sort. The "a" and "b" footnotes have the advantage of doubling as links to the external pages. It is rather unfortunate that we have so many stubs on the World Heritage Sites - another example of top-priority articles that are not as good as they should be: there is usually quite good information in the UNESCO evaluations. Anyway, I have taken the opportunity to expand this one. The infobox is still longer than the text, though.

On the other hand, I see that Vall de Boí has attracted a second infobox with continental dot and comma separators (population of "1.062", area of "219,49 km²"), displacing the beautiful Christ Pantocrator with some ugly grey "?" images. Grr. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I just avoid them, I was going to turn poor old Archie Rosebery into a FAC but then saw he had a box so did his almost non notable Mrs instead because she did not already have one, although I see some cheeky person has added one of my images of him for Lady R's page to his box because the old one was so vile. Then what happened? - someone nominated her for some wiki-competition and comments were made that she needed an info box. Well, I soon sorted that one out! - What amazes me when I was going through all the peerage (now there is a dreadful section) pages linking from kittybrewster's pages the other day, was how people can spend ages on succession boxes, info boxes and other such things of enormous complexity but not feel the need to add a single reference. It is not worth expanding a page with an info-box already because the creators of these boxes become very territorial and defensive of them - so best to just avoid them completely. Giano 16:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Terence John Arbuthnot
An article that you have been involved in editing, Terence John Arbuthnot, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Terence John Arbuthnot (2nd nomination). Thank you. —  irides centi   (talk to me!)  23:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I have been looking at it and planning to nominate it for ages. You have beaten me to it! We must though now be careful what we say about the pages. Kittybrewsyter emails admins and has editors blocked to dispute his facts see :. If it was up to me Kittybrewster would be permanently banned for knowingly adding drivel and trivia to Wikipedia, as it is the more forthright Vintagekits who is banned. The blocking admin Mr D'Arcy should be ashamed of himself.  Obviously they all live in Jane Austen fantasy land together. Giano 06:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Bingham Arbuthnot
I've solved it- see the afd page. Thanks for the strike out tip BTW. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Mind if I make a suggestion? (re:Vintagekits/Kittybrewster)
I know that after the go round a while back that I got into with you, User:Bishonen and User:Geogre, I'm probably not one of your favorites, but after having read the situation on ANI regarding the above, perhaps if a RfC fails, we can look at opening something up on the Community Sanction Board and work towards a Community Topic ban for User:Kittybrewster on articles regarding the Arbuthnots, since apparently one and all are ignoring the Conflict of Interest of an Arbuthnot creating and editing articles about Arbuthnots. Just something to keep in mind, possibly. SirFozzie 07:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't rememeber having dealt with you before, but I never hold grudges (well, for long anyway) so no matter. Yes something has got be done and the sooner the better. That Kittyybrewster can email an admin have another user blocked, and that admin is so incompetent that he does not bother to check Kittbrewster's history page and see all the warnings to Kittybrewster blamked is beyond my comprehension. He needs de-sysoping, and Kittybrewster banning for repeatedly adding rubbish to Wikipedia Giano 07:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It was during one of the "Admins on IRC" flare ups. No biggie. And I agree with you, and have said so on the ANI discussion. Anyway, 4 AM is a bit late for me, so have a good one! SirFozzie 07:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow. I really envy you guys your lousy memories, it would be great to forget that type of stuff. I'm serious, I try to, but I can't. "No biggie" ( = I didn't do nothin') must feel so good. Bishonen | talk 19:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Hopefully someone soon will have the good sense to unblock him. Giano 08:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah I see Mr Darcy has just reblocked Vintagekits - now there will be some fireowrks! Giano 13:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I hope not :( -- ALoan (Talk) 15:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Harriet
Congratulations. That's the way to do it. A little encouragement to put other pages forward, hmm? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:51, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Go on, put Hannah up for it too. On another note, if you get a spare moment could you check that I've linked to the right people on Benjamin Bates - too many Dashwoods and le Despencers floating around for my liking and I thought you might be able to throw a bit of light left over from your research on West Wycombe Park on the matter. Yomangani talk 12:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I may nominate Hannah, but first I have to kill the red links in the lead, or better still absorb them into a philantropy section, and there is nothing written beyond what is in the Jewish Encyclopedia about that part of her life - as far as I know what I have written is the longest biography of her. The second she is nomnated peoplewill scream about those red links I can't face it at the moment.  West Wycombe was ages ago, I have forgotten all of that research but i will have a liik later. Thanks for the congratulations, it is nice that someone noticed I have done my best for the bloody Arbuthnots! Giano 16:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * A wise man once said: "Redlinks are one of the benefits of a wiki - they encourage others to contribute material to make the redlink turn blue. Many people think it is more helpful to leave a link red than to create a bunch of one-line stubs which provide a misleading impression of Wikipedia's (lack of) comprehensiveness.". Redlink haters make me mad (now I wish I had a Bishzilla type alter ego). Yomangani talk 16:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I wonder who that wise man was and when he said it, but I find SamuelWantman here saying: "Redlinks are a very useful part of wikis. They inspire people to write articles." -- ALoan (Talk) 18:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * But didn't you know? :-) You can now change some setting somewhere so that all the stub pages appear a different colour (well, all the short pages, anyway, which is not quite the same thing). That way, people can now follow their eyes to short pages and expand them! Carcharoth 21:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

IRC blocks
Greetings, Giano,

I would be curious to see your reaction to this thread on WP:ANI, related to a block of User:Badlydrawnjeff which was decided on IRC.Proabivouac 10:51, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * As I read it, the block was not "decided" in any proper sense on IRC - it was discussed on IRC and most people counseled against it, and the admin went and blocked anyway. I think pretty much everyone agrees that it was a very bad block, and IRC had little to do with it. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you ALoan. Proabivouac, I have commented here on Badlydrawnjeff's talk page. I really cannot understand why people just don't plaster the IRC logs all over Wikipedia, then everyone would know the truth.  When I glanced at them earlier this morning, I did not think is quite so simple, cut and dried as ALoan seems to think but one thing I'm 100% sure of is that the truth will out. Giano 12:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I feel quite left out - no-one ever sends IRC logs to me. Nevertheless, I am sure that everything is for the best in this best of possible worlds. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * OH I Have hundred of IRC logs - I may publish them in installments one day - who knows. Giano 16:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Insults
I understand you're worked up with LuciferMorgan. However, I can't see anything in his post that was rude about you, or any reason to have whatever argument you are having on that FAR page. The Land 16:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Can't you? Well -  it is odd you have twice felt the need to remove it then. Now please leave itwhere it is! Giano
 * I agree with Giano on this one. LuciferMorgan 16:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah-ha, you're agreeing on something. Perhaps the next thing you can agree on is that FARC should be about the merits of the article in question and not be a scene for the most recent act of a wikiconflict. It appears to me that you ar both using that page to have an argument, more or less for the sake of an argument. You should not be using process pages to do that. The Land 17:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You seriously can't see anything rude about Giano in LM's post, The Land? His first post was aimed at Giano in toto. Why else do you suppose Marskell called it a "flame post"? And who do you suppose LM means by his insinuations about "the same people voting keep"— Paul August? I don't see Giano having an argument, either. "Explain yourself in full" is an argument? Giano is the one having an argument? Please stop removing posts. LM isn't a baby, he can take responsibility for what he posts, all by himself. Bishonen | talk 17:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC).


 * Indeed I can take responsibility for what I post, though I 100% disagree with Bishonen insinuating I am solely to blame. If "the same people" didn't make an utter mockery of FARC as they've done in the past, I wouldn't have been complaining. As concerns Giano, he can also take responsibility for what he posts too, all by himself. And that'll be a change actually, instead of you Bishonen or someone else intervening. LuciferMorgan 22:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Lucifer why not run along and go and find something useful to do. It's a nice day now go and play outside. Giano 06:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why don't you Giano? Go along and have Bishonen or Geogre take you on the swings. LuciferMorgan 15:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

An interesting arbuthnot
Evie Green got mentioned as a spouse in one of the Kittybrewster articles. I googled and found masses of pictures of here - obviously I highly photographed actress - which given the dates looks fairly notable. I got a little interested. However, I can find very little actual biographical information. Any thoughts - is this worth an article User:Doc glasgow/Evie Greene--Docg 10:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps she is, but I feel I have done my bit for the House of Arbuthnot. I'm sure you will inderstand if I say I could joyously spend the rest of my life without meeting one ever again. Don't let that deter you though! Giano 13:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * PS: She does not look very happy does she? - being married to an Arbuthnot no doubt! Giano 13:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Died young too.--Docg 13:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * probably a merciful release. Giano 13:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I have released her into the article space. Very stubby, but adequately sourced. Evie Greene. --Docg 14:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Very nice Doc, one small point, Chief Constables in those days were not actually policemen - it was an honary position given to local wothies and retited army officers (who retained their army titles) rather like Magistrates etc - the police force per se was not a profession joined by the upper middle classes. Have you considered placing her in Category:Arbuthnot family? Giano 14:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed thanks - and no, I've grown to like her.--Docg 14:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Being "retited" sounds painful. Paul August &#9742; 14:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah Paul, so you are returned to us from your travels, I hope you are suitably bronzed, sun-kissed and ready for some action. Giano 20:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Bassano
Could assist on the Bassano page? Thanks Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 16:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverting comments on talk pages
So it's ok to revert them if they're comments you don't like? The Land 21:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Not at all, I was acting on advice, if you want to see the IRC troll let us re-instate him, here you are:- Happy now? Giano 21:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * == LuciferMorgan ==

Please do not bait this user, who has been blocked. Edits like this give an impression which I earnestly hope is inaccurate. —Phil | Talk 16:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * What an extraordinary comment, knowing nothing about the situation at all - you may think you are very clever, I don't think your comment is clever in fact it is rather stupid. I think it is baiting and probably trolling too, now be off with you and find something constructive to do, and if that is too hard for you, then go and chatter on IRC or whatever else it is you do when bored but please don't ease you boredom here. Giano 18:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The more I think about your ridiculous comment the more I think the general editorship here needs to know what goes on on IRC. Giano 19:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Villa Spedalotto
Dear Giano,

I've corrected some little errors on the page of Villa Spedalotto. I've other informations about, but I can't write so well in english. May I send you this info in a schematic way, and you write it?

best

Vps 4:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear Giano,

I've added some other informations on Villa Spedalotto, can you read it and correct my language errors?? And sure also the style.. I traslated into English from Italian, don't think that the writing style could be the same!

thanks

Vps 17:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * dear Giano,

why you've cut a part of the text? as you asked me, that's the original text I wrote for Santa Flavia on Italian Wikipedia:


 * Villa Spedalotto


 * Villa Spedalotto è una residenza di villeggiatura situata su una collina ai margini della piana di Solanto, circondata da oliveti e agrumeti. La casa, ad un piano, è costruita attorno ad una corte aperta, con due corpi di servizio che si dipartono dal corpo principale, al centro del quale si trova un pronao in stile Neoclassico. Commissionata nel 1783 da don Barbaro Arezzo all'architetto Giovanni Emanuele Incardona (o Cardona, attivo a Palermo dal 1775 al 1820), fu costruita tra il 1784 ed il 1793.


 * Il progettista fu allievo dell'architetto Giuseppe Venanzio Marvuglia, il massimo esponente del Neoclassicismo in Sicilia. Nel 1790, ancora in costruzione, fu acquistata da Onofrio Emanuele Paternò, Barone di Spedalotto. Gli interni sono affrescati in uno stile tra il Neoclassico-Pompeiano e l'Impero, e sono attribuiti ad Elia Interguglielmi.


 * Nel 1845 fu posta l'attuale pavimentazione della terrazza, in maioliche bicrome bianche e blu di Vietri, mentre tra il 1900 ed il 1902 furono sostituiti i pavimenti all'interno. La parte centrale del prospetto, parzialmente danneggiata da un bombardamento aereo alleato nel 1943, fu ricostruita nel 1945.


 * Dal 9 ottobre al 9 dicembre 1799, sono stati ospitati i principi reali ereditari Francesco di Borbone (futuro Re Francesco I) con la consorte Maria Clementina d’Asburgo, e la figlia Maria Carolina (futura Duchessa di Berry). La famiglia reale, fuggita da Napoli per la rivoluzione del 1799, era divisa tra Villa Spedalotto (i principi reali) e Villa Valguarnera (i sovrani Ferdinando I e Maria Carolina).


 * Successivamente vi soggiorneranno Francesco II di Borbone, duca di Calabria, e Luigi Filippo d'Orleans, futuro re dei Francesi. Una tradizione vuole che in questa Villa sia nato, nel 1810, Ferdinando II di Borbone Re delle Due Sicilie, ma la storiografia ufficiale lo indica nato a Palermo, a Palazzo Reale.


 * Durante gli anni 70 del XIX secolo vi soggiornò spesso l'astronomo gesuita padre Angelo Secchi che, amico del Marchese di Spedalotto, usava la terrazza per le sue osservazioni.


 * Il 30 marzo 1987, nella cappella della Villa, è stato celebrato il matrimonio tra il duca d'Aosta Amedeo di Savoia e Silvia Paternò dei Marchesi di Regiovanni, Baroni di Spedalotto e Conti di Prades (Palermo, 31 dicembre 1953).


 * Nel 1991 è stata la location per alcune scene del film Johnny Stecchino di Roberto Benigni. (Proprietà privata)

troubled Houses
Is that what you where looking for Tynan Abbey burnt down in early 80s.--padraig3uk 10:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It was blown up actually. 1981.  It was then demolished (as a ruin) in 1997.  Some stonework was saved though. --Counter-revolutionary 10:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I see your working on an article on the Lost Houses. Looks good. --Counter-revolutionary 10:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Talk about fast, thank you that will do brilliantly, profuse thanks - I've just seen a new angle for what could be a dull page. I'm sure though there was a very large neoclassical one too - any ideas what that was called? Giano 10:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There may have been one partly destroyed in the south, I will try and find out for you later.--padraig3uk 10:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Florence Court, which isn't a great house, burnt down - but they restored it. Antrim Castle, which was Massereene and Ferrard's, was burnt by the IRA.  There were so many, from south to north.  I shall have a look and get back to you. --Counter-revolutionary 10:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - they have to ne in the North though to qualify for this page, actuall Tynan does very well as it was attacked in the 1920 as well as 70s. This page though is pure architecture - politics only appear as a background to explain why house were demolished. Giano 10:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "ne in the North".  Yes, Tynan was attacked in the 1920s, there were police stationed at the house as a result.  Castlewellan Castle was also damaged by a bomb, as they thought the army were using it.  It just took out a rather nice staircase however.  Antrim was quite a fine house. --Counter-revolutionary 11:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * There was also one, I think it was called 'Barnscourt', in Strabane, home of Northern Ireland Senator Barnhill, Blown up by the OIRA in the 70s' the Senator was also killed, that wasn't realy a big house, more a large Georgian mansion.--padraig3uk 10:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you thinking of Drumbanagher, Poyntzpass? It was huge, and in very good order, but the Close's just knocked it down... --Counter-revolutionary 11:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you both, they don't have to be huge - just architecturally interesting, country houses, and completely demolished. Barnscourt if Georgian would be great as would Drumbanagher wspecially if its owners just knocked it down, as it show the same thing was happening in Ireland as in England, also it does not make Irish demolitions entirely the fault of The Troubles. I'll see what google does withthose names. Thanks Giano 12:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Senator Jack Barnhills house was called Brickfield House see: .--padraig3uk 12:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Aha that I was googling it as we speak and having limited results thanks Giano 12:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think you were thinking of the Abercorns at Baronscourt. Drumbanaher was by Playfair (I think) the porte-cochère is still there, and it's about the size of a house itslef. --Counter-revolutionary 13:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I realy want 2 or 3, one destroyed by its owners; one as result of conflict and one other so long as it is interesting - I shall alomost certainly go with Tynan as it is interesting Gothic and attacked twice - then I want a nice example of Irish Georgian of neoclassical and then one other. Research at the moeny is suggesting that Drumbanagher Castle will do as it may have been Neoclassical (looking at Playfairs other works) but i can't find an image yet.  Antrim Castle fits the bill but seems to be still standing so is out. Giano 13:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No, Antrim's gone. Here it is; . There may be a tower there, but most [all] is gone.  Glenarm, where the Earl of Antrim lives - in case that's mixing you up.  Also found this book;  .  I may as well buy a copy, it could help with referencing at some point.  I have some photographs of Drumbanagher somewhere. --Counter-revolutionary 13:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Better one on Anrtim; . --Counter-revolutionary 13:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you sure the front looks very much like this if I were paying £540 a night for this, and got there to find the IRA had blown it up, the IRA would regret it, and find they are no match for the Mafioso. 13:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Positive. That's Glenarm Castle, the Earl of Antrim's seat. They are two different places. No idea why they're calling it "Antrim Castle". --Counter-revolutionary 13:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It's the Irish they do it deliberatly to confuse - must make it hard though when getting their on sat-nav. Giano 13:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Re Drumbanagher Castle it was often referred to as Drumbanagher House- there is a little about the selling of the estate around 1900 at the bottom of this page - the Poyntzpass and District Local History Society may well have photos of it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * A description of it here . Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I always knew it as Drumbanagher House, none of this Castle business. I have a quote by the son-in-law of the Close who had it demolished.  Say's there was nothing wrong with it, all perfectly fine, but no mortal on earth could upkeep a house of such proportions - now it looks like a nuclear bomb hit it!  The family still own the land, as is true of Tyanan Abbey too. --Counter-revolutionary 14:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * --Counter-revolutionary 14:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I saw that- but no idea whether the photos still exist now.. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * From The Times, January 29, 1903: at Drumbanagher, MAXWELL CHARLES CLOSE, D.L., ex- M.P. county Armagh, in his 76th year, of pneumonia following influenza. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * His son Major Maxwell A Close married Muriel Albany, daughter of the fifth Earl Castle Stewart. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello, I am a descendant of the Close Family. My mother's mother was Hazel Close. Is there any information anyone requires?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.127.70.194 (talk) 18:30, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks all of you, but without a free image it is a no go - I'm only assuing it will be palladian or neoclassical, if not it is back to the drawing board. I need two the Gothic we have (which was bombed) the other must have been destroyed by its owner. Any ideas on one anywhere in UK demolished by German bombing? Giano 14:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It was neoclassical. I have photographs, I think, but I'll need to look them out...That could take a while. --Counter-revolutionary 14:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be great so long as they were taken 70 odd years ago I think they will be allowed unless you took them yourself! Giano 14:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The ought to be around that age. Why should it matter whether I took them/?  The house was demolished around '53 I think.  --Counter-revolutionary 14:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think age matters as long as the person who took it or their heir is willing to release it under a free license. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * All to do with the copyright! If CR took them he can release the copyright, otherwise we have to be sure the copyright owner has been dead for x years or his heirs/owners have to release copyrigt into the public domaine, which is complicated and in my experience more trouble than it is worth, as they always want to release just for wikipedia, which is not allowed, then it all become too complicated and stressfull, ss they never undrstand the logic neither do I for that matter, but there we are. Giano 15:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ...nor do I! --Counter-revolutionary 16:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think they have to free to use by anyone as Wikipedia content is used on sites that carry adverts (i.e. commercial sites) like Answers.com and if you start making money from stuff that other people own rights to it creates obvious legal entanglements. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Antrim Castle

 * I'll try and find out more information about Antrim, I know the old Viscount M&F was there at the time, with his parents; rumour has it they chased the IRA away with shot guns. I presume that saved their lives but not the Castle's.  It certainly sounds interesting enough; 1921 I believe. --Counter-revolutionary 20:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Info. on Antrim Castle's history --Counter-revolutionary 20:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The Antrim Castle fire. Lord Massereene, his family and a house party were present in Antrim Castle when it was burnt by the IRA in 1922. Many items of great historical importance, most notably the Chair of the Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, which was the centrepiece of a venerable, but highly inflammable, 'Oak Room', were destroyed in the fire. But the presence of mind of Lord Massereene and his staff, and the length of time which it takes for a very large house to be consumed by a fire, saved much that would otherwise have been lost. The daughter of the Archbishop of Armagh, who was staying at the time, was nearly lost, but jumped out of a window. A 900-piece, soft paste, 'Etruscan Honeysuckle' dinner service of Foster provenance was thrown from the drawing-room windows into the Six Mile Eater, but few pieced survived the experience, and then only in a battered state. Much furniture, some of it large, was rescued. More would have been rescued, except that the townspeople of Antrim, who turned out in large numbers to help, thought that the most important thing to be saved was the billiard table. Thirty men laboured successfully to get it out of the castle.

Among the major survivals were the family portraits. A comparison with the portraits itemised by C.H. O'Neill in 1860 and those surviving in family possession today, suggests a rescue operation of almost miraculous success (although it has to be remembered that many portraits and other important pieces were probably in the London town house in 1922, or with the Dowager Lady Massereene at her house in Hampshire). Other major survivals were Anthony and John (Speaker) Foster's important collection of pamphlets, which had been in the Antrim Castle library since at least 1863 (when a library catalogue was printed). The Foster papers, which had probably only recently arrived at Antrim Castle, following the sale of Oriel Temple in 1920, survived because they had been placed in the stable block, not in the Castle itself. This possibly accounts for the much lower survival-rate of the Massereene papers.

The late (13th) Viscount Massereene, who was a small boy at the time, had vivid recollections of the fire. He remembered being trapped with his mother in a light well (from which they narrowly escaped, and being told by her that they were going to die there. Most clearly of all, he remembered the nursery cat with its fur on fire.--Counter-revolutionary 20:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Good but the page is purely architectural - no interiors - no memories - I know about the Massereenes, and knew Owl House too for a time, but this page is going to be very factual. Giano 20:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * As should all pages on wikipedia! I think Antrim Castle would merit its own article though. --Counter-revolutionary 20:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think all those houses there would and one day hopefully will, I have carefully selected them for notable qualities. Giano 20:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI
An affair in which you are interested is being discussed here. Bishonen | talk 10:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Thanks - I saw. Having seen the standard of wit and comment on David Lauder's page between him and his friends when referring to people they feel oppose their views .  I don't think I can be bothered to join the discussion.  Fortunately, most people who edit Wikipedia are able to form their own opinions as to whether Doc Glasgow, and I know the difference between a page worth having and one worth deleting.  Nothing more to discuss really.  This is a modern encyclopedia not the shuttered drawing room, in 1920s Bayswater, of an  octogenarian widow of a recently ennobled  soap manufacturer - which is what some of the comments I have seen seriously made on  Wikipedia in the last 48 hours put me in mind.  No doubt we shall soon be warned to look under our beds for Bolsheviks.Giano 12:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ...no need to look as far as under the bed. --Counter-revolutionary 13:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't think so. Giano 14:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Arbuthnot articles
Hi Giano, I see you've been redirecting some articles regarding non-notable people in the Arbuthnot family. Personally, I agree that these are best represented by the single article about the Arbuthnot Baronetcy, but I thought it only fair to advise you that there's been some considerable controversy in the past about whether or not a Baronet is in fact notable simply by virtue of being one. There is a body of discussion on the topic already. I'll dig out the appropriate links if you need me to &mdash; but if you've already seen and considered them, then no worries, feel free to just ignore this message :) – Kieran T  (' talk ') 16:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it is fine I think now it is just a matter of being sensible and doing some tidying up, in fact I eas just following some links from some of those pages to the "Arbuthnot extended family" and wondering of we need such pages as this Frederick Gerard Peake at all. Giano 16:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Another AFD up here. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I've seen, can you work out what i have done wrong here why won't Charles Ramsay Arbuthnot display in the lost properly, but appears as a red link at the bottom - foxed me completely! Giano 22:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * OK - sorted it myself Giano 22:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was just about to say that I'd done it- you need to copy the thing with afd3 on it on the afd box and then paste it at the top. I couldn't believe the thing about the honorary game warden BTW. Curiously he was actually complaining about the elephants being shot, the opposite of what you might expect... Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not bothered about the elephants, it is a sad fact that every other person was big game hunting there at that time, it was politically and socially acceptable so one can't condemn people for doing it, or not, as the case may be. I have just nominated another for deletion as you know, I see Kittybrewster has been banned for 7 days this time, pity it was not for 7 months as that is how long it will probably take to sort out the mess and conflict he has created. Giano 22:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * At least in Kenya (and other parts of Arfica) they realise that conservation helps the country- unfortunately the same can't help the tiger in India as I don't imagine many tourists have fun spotting tigers in the forest (and if they do its probably to kill another one). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Good job with Mrs Arbuthnot, Giano. I always have misgivings about the candidature process, and generally take articles off my watchlist as soon as they're being FACked with. --Wetman 02:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Wetman - it's nice to see an Arbuthnot at the right end of Wikipedia. Giano 15:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI redux
Just a notice that you are being discussed here. I hope your ears are not burning.--Isotope23 16:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Well done
Thanks, long way to go yet! Giano 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Civility
Your comment on Kittybrewster's talk page, shown here, was unwarranted and unhelpful. There's nothing wrong with a civil content dispute, but referring to another editor's work as "the mess you created" is incivil and contributes nothing to resolving the dispute. I urge you to reconsider making such statements in the future. --Hemlock Martinis 01:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * My edit was factual. I withdraw not one word of it. That an editor can edit the same page (Clan Arbuthnott) 32 times on members of his family and then say "What I think is that there is no such thing as Clan Arbuthnott" when he has already created a further 60 odd stubs which other editors are spending time sorting, expanding, deleting is ridiculous.  If he wishes to make edits it would be better if he made them to his  pages he which does feel exist - most of which are direly in need of help, rather than to pages which yet again others are going to have to sort out  in order to maintain Wikipeda's creditability. At present nominating for deletion is the only way of doing this, where they are either deleted (as many have been -  or better still improved ). All of this is happening with not one jot of help from him. Consequently, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion the man is a menace to the project. This is not a vendetta, or a plot by the IRA and the communist party (as his supporters claims)  it is an attempt to sort the mess out which is only being hampered by that editer and a very small band of his friends. Now instead of coming here with your complaints I suggest you go and address some of the more serious accusations coming from Kittybrewster's camp. Giano 07:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not here to discuss your content disagreement, nor whether or not Kittybrewster is a liar, nor your accusations of a cabal. What I am here for is when you call another editor's work "a mess" and then proceed to call that same editor a "menace to the project". That kind of blatant hostility is NOT conducive to content discussions and is never warranted here. Please use a less aggressive tone when talking to other editors. Thank you. --Hemlock Martinis 08:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you go and check some facts. There is no "content disagreement" for there is virtually no content to disagree over. Errors in the work are removed as they are found. I make no accusations that Kittybrewster is a liar - that his work is poorly researched and often erroneous is beyond doubt - that does not make him a liar - unless of course he is deliberately adding rubbish to Wikipedia, which I don't think he is. I make no accusations of cabals either because cabals hold no fear at all for me, in my experience, if one's work is of acceptable standard then no cabal can touch one. In fact Kittybrester's clique is so ignorant of Wikipedia's processes and aims I doubt they re capable of decorating a Christmas tree let alone forming a cabal.

That Kittybrewster's work is a mess is proven by the number of editors currently trying to organize/improve/verify it. There is no "blatant hostility" here merely an attempt to sort things out in a detached and efficient manner, if not agreeing with the "Kitybrewster crowd" is considered hostile, then so be it. Quite frankly, this problem is not helped by comments such as yours by people who only seem to be aware of half the story. If you wish to join or give credence to that rather naive group screaming "terrorists, vendetta, republicans" at those wishing to maintain standards then please do -  but  please don't bother returning her unless you have something useful or constructive to say in dealing with this matter, as I wish to proceed with something more useful than time-wasting and  facetious debate with you. Thank you. Giano 08:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've blocked you for 24 hours. I hope that when you return you are able to proceed with your discussions in a more civil manner. --Hemlock Martinis 14:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please tell me this block was for something other than the above comments? Editors are allowed to consider someone's editing poor and in need of being fixed.  Friday (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to say that I totally disagree with this block, I've been checking through Giano's contribs and I really can't see what you've blocked for.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  14:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Referring to someone as a menace to the project is totally inappropriate and definitely well outside the bounds of our civility guidelines. The block is deserved. --Durin 14:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, it's not nice. But you think a block helps? Some people are menaces to the project.  (Not saying it applies to anyone in this case as I have no interest in whatever this dispute is about.)  Friday (talk) 14:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Draws a line in the sand and provides a caution to the user that this behavior is not accepted. --Durin 14:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Calling Kittybrewster's work "a mess" might not be everyone's choice of words but it's not a mischaracterization. What on earth are you blocked for? Mackensen (talk) 14:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

This is an extremely misguided block. My only question is whether to unblock summarily or take it to the noticeboard. Newyorkbrad 14:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Please lets do this on the noticeboard, and let's discuss for a few min before we jump to unblock. Although, I suspect that's what is needed.--Docg 14:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Commented there. Newyorkbrad 14:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Could we have a link to the "noticeboard" please? For the record, I also think this block is an over-reaction. Sure, there is the potential for these comments to be read as uncivil, but at the same time, there's the possibility that they are factually accurate, in the sense that there is a definition of the word "mess"... – Kieran T  (' talk ') 14:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Giano blocked. Newyorkbrad 14:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool heads
OK, I've opened a thread on ANI and asked for the blocking admin to exlain himself. Let's no-one rush to judgement here. Please let's keep perspective and sort this.--Docg 14:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, he's been unblocked. Let's just leave it at that.--Docg 14:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I have responded with my reasons for blocking on the AN/I page. --Hemlock Martinis 23:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Noted. I have responded. I'd ask all parties now to move on and deal with the underlying content issues.--Docg 23:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, Giano, thanks for staying reasonably cool over the blocking. I'm not getting into the rights and wrongs, but the usually rhetorical explosion everyone gets into (on both sides) is ....well... a bit dull now?--Docg 08:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You rang? El_C 08:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I got the right number! El_C 08:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

No I don't think so EL C, perhaps you have the wrong number. Thanks Doc I completely agree with you, I am in fact very cool, ice cold in fact. I'm not scared off easily so it is back to work on this matter. I've given my views on Kittybrewster's proposed solution here. I'm really pleases by how much some of the pages are improved by a spell on AFD - it's amazing the knowledge there is on Wikipedia when one can tap into it. What concerns me though is not the pages which are seemingly obvious candidates for AFD it those that are not. What errors are buried deep in those - the problem is it would be such a bore to have to trawl through them all. I still like my idea of a panel of Arbs and respected admins but I suspect volunteers would be thin on the ground. Perhaps Harriet Arbuthnot being on the main page will encourage others to research this fascinating family - we may even get some more information on her - I did knock her out quite hurriedly.

Finally, thank you to the many people who commented yesterday. I appreciated every comment. I was very surprised by some of the people who did speak on my behalf - I actually missed the show live but watching the recorded highlights was very interesting and revealing. I must be doing something right. Thanks all of you. Giano 08:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Bit late with a comment to this. What a pity that I have been busy in Russian Wikipedia all day. Some people would like to leave their mark on block logs. You know, look at me, I blocked Jimbo Wales, look at how important I am. Something along these lines, I believe. This will continue as long as we have block logs in perpetuity. The issue of perennial and sacred block logs is being discussed in an ongoing arbitration case, by the way. I advise you to take the latest incident lightly. --Ghirla-трёп- 19:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ghiirla, I gave it the consideration it deserved. Giano 23:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)