User talk:Johnbod/14

Roman brick - 2 years on
Hello Johnbod. A couple years ago you participated in a discussion with me at Talk:Roman brick and offered some tips and advice on the article. It's been a couple years now and the article has changed significantly. I was wondering if you thought it appropriate to remove the "globalize" tag at this juncture. I would also be interested in any other tips you have on the article, Roman brick. I have added quite a lot of information, and it probably needs some minor tweaking (might be redundant in several places) but I was able to add info on some of your original suggestions too. The article isn't yet where it needs to be in terms of comprehensiveness but I think it now encompasses a much broader spectrum than what it once was, essentially Roman brick in modern American architecture - as you put it. Anyway, if you have the time when you return from your wikibreak your input would be greatly valued. Thanks. --IvoShandor (talk) 06:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look. I agree whole heartedly with your last edit summary. I'm still looking for more information, of course, I am sure I will eventually find what is needed. Thanks again.--IvoShandor (talk) 07:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Tabernacles

 *  A reply and a query has been made to your comment left here. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 16:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC) 

Alois Plum
I saw your revert and your note; I think I understand now. Do you have any suggestions about adding a category so Plum shows up as a Christian artist? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Portraiture in Ancient Egypt
You might be interested in the above. The author has only 7 other edits, so I'm guessing a school assignment of some sort. Still. Ceoil (talk) 14:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Prince of the Blood
Can you clarify what happened to the name of this article after your comment at Talk:Prince du Sang? It looks to me as if you reverted it back to the English term Prince of the Blood (which allowed the article to address use of the title in other monarchies than the French) but that it was subsequently re-directed back to Prince du sang, although I can't be sure, and can't find consensus for the move. Thanks. Lethiere (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, all I did was divert 2 redirects there, & rvt (22 April 08) someone who was trying to make the whole article a redirect to Famille du roi. Really i think the English name would be better - let me know if you set up a move proposal. Johnbod (talk) 00:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of The Battle of Alexander at Issus
I have done a GA Reassessment of The Battle of Alexander at Issus as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article to nearly meet the current GA Criteria. I did see a couple of issues that cause me to not immediately keep the article at GA. I have placed it on hold for a week pending work. My review can be found here. I am notifying you as one of the primary editors in the hopes that work can be done. Should you have questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Little masters
Heh, close enough! Thanks for catching the mistake.  LunarLander  //  talk  // 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
 freshacconci  talk talk  00:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Sculpture at Chartres
Believe it or not, these incredibly well-preserved statues appear to be the real thing. They are in a completely sheltered spot and wouldn't suffer from the usual processes of erosion. The problem in areas such as this is usually caused by water seepage from above, which then evaporates from the carved surfaces, bringing the salts to the surface and flaking off the stone. The more intricately carved the surface, the more water evaporates and the more that it corrodes. If there is little seepage, then the problem is minimised. My computer has been on the blink for a week.... just a little problem with the fan. Now the keyboard doesn't work! My dear son found me another keyboard from an almost vintage IBM. It's so solid and heavy that I feel as If I'm driving the computer with a prime mover. Amandajm (talk) 10:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I prefer classic keyboards myself, though I hear they are moving to remove the left hand caps lock, which would be sensible. Johnbod (talk) 12:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Ars Moriendi
It was actually redirecting to itself. I probably should have checked the capitalisation but its nothing for you to get worked up over. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 13:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Books made into films
Since you commented in the original CfD, you may be interested in commenting in the current successor CfD. --Cybercobra (talk) 03:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Medieval Art
Just to clarify, when I said "it's not very well cited", I was referring to the hook rather than the article. And yes, you did a great job of expanding the article, but we do have our rules and the statement in the article about medieval art being an interplay between three different styles wasn't directly cited. Gatoclass (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Understood, but my reference to the pages was re the hook reference, which is really something you have to write a chapter rather than a sentence about, so those are the more useful references. Johnbod (talk) 18:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

It's rare to see such an important and well-written article pop up at DYK. Bravo! Savidan 19:27, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 20:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Wonderful! It's rare to see such well-illustrated articles at Wikipedia anywhere. Srnec (talk) 04:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That's really impressive!--Wetman (talk) 06:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Maccabiah golden medalists
I have added two more categories to the CFD nomination. You may wish to add to what you wrote. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages
I noticed that you edited Montserrat (disambiguation). Disambiguation pages actually have a rather narrow set of guidelines, aimed at directing readers with a known topic in mind to the appropriate article as quickly as possible. ENeville (talk) 03:38, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I restored the doubtless unintentionally dropped disambiguating information and fixed the offending redlinks.--Wetman (talk) 01:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The redlinks weren't a problem actually. The concern with dab page style is expediting finding a desired article.  This includes paring descriptions, avoiding piped links, excluding entries with only partial title matches, and presenting information in as consistent a format as possible.  Please see MOS:DAB, per edit comments.  I think that it's valid to have redlinks for settlements, but I don't need to fight their exclusion.  By the way, are you, Wetman, also Johnbod? ENeville (talk) 03:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely - if you look at our histories you'll see we enjoy conversing with ourself. Johnbod (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Interlace
A nunber of arts articles linked to interlace which is about television encoding, so I created Interlace (visual arts) and updated the appropriate wikilinks. I'd appreciate any improvements you might make when you get back. - PKM (talk) 20:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Autoreviewer
Thanks for creating quality articles, you're now an autoreviewer. --Closedmouth (talk) 03:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Read up on your new self at Autoreviewer.--Wetman (talk) 06:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Works of art
I don't think you're quite correct. The Marriage of Figaro (not a newspaper) is a work of art with "the" in the title. Similarly The Merchant of Venice, A Midsummer Night's Dream. Similarly The Four Seasons (Vivaldi) and The Four Seasons (Poussin). All English language books on the subject have "The Triumphs of Caesar" in the title (see the sources being added to the article). Another example is The School of Athens. There's also The Seasons (Haydn), The Just Judges,The Ecstasy of St. Cecilia (Raphael), etc. I don't think the New York Times was a well chosen example. Please look at The Times, The Independent and The Guardian (none of them redirects). The title is the least of the worries with the article. As an article on one of the most celebrated series of Italian paintings of the fifteenth century, it was almost completely unsourced and many of the statements are in the style of a personal essay (even if they are undoubtedly correct, e.g. the dim lighting for the displays at Hampton Court Palace). Mathsci (talk) 16:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Perusal of the first 2 or so pages of this Google search shows how art historians refer to the work - not consistently, but a majority with no "the" or a lower-case one. I'm sure you're right about the article. Unlike literary works, few paintings of that date have an original and certain title in any case, though I doubt this one has ever been called anything else. Johnbod (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Johnbody
Sorry - a typo I didn't notice...  Ty  23:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob! Do you "fancy" doing the Review nom? Johnbod (talk) 23:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not now thanks. I am squeezed for time. If you do, please notify me.  Ty  00:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Lateran
It's not a "silly tag," but thanks for the subsequent edit. Dppowell (talk) 15:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Goya
I'd like to make a start on the The Disasters of War (still, sadly, a redirect) but am wondering about the background section. Would a lift of the same section from The Third of May 1808 (although since the disasters cover a 16 yr period the text would be necessaraly need to be more summary and extended to cover events to 1814) be unethical? I'm not sure how duplicated text accross articles is viewed here. I have a sketch in a txt file but don't want to post until I am more clear on this. Thanks. Ceoil (talk) 19:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * you can do it, but you have to link to the original article in the edit summary to preserve the history. Peninsular_War is a start. I'll keep an eye out. Johnbod (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Appreciated. Ceoil (talk) 20:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have always been fond of the way you tend to place an 2nd image just below the lead pic. But christ, its now some depressing artice. Ceoil (talk) 00:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Goes with the territory! We can't really stick in a Kate Greenaway to compensate... Johnbod (talk) 00:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So says who. Precious! Ceoil (talk) 00:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI
If you want to work on building these: 1; 2. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Lead section‎
You did not sign your comment at Wikipedia talk:Lead section‎. Also, I think you supported a prior nom of Crown Fountain, which is up at FAC again.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:54, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Miseries
Certainly! Hopefully we don't get both the Goya and the Callot on DYK at the same time, lest we be seen as morbid. Two idle thoughts while I'm here. Does "first anti-war statement" in western art seem a reasonable claim to you? I assume so, as you left it there. Second, I like the article under the French name. I was wondering when someone would suggest it be moved. I am going to add the artist link to the DYK statement. Outriggr (talk) 23:18, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I thought it was a bit OTT, & should be given a "said to be". Becker disagrees with it - he talks of (not a quote from him, but a paraphrase I've added to the Goya) "a wider European tradition of art about war and its effect on civilian life ... especially of Dutch artists depicting the Eighty Years War with Spain, and German 16th century artists such as Hans Baldung." and also says (this too rather extreme imo) "Callot's rather dispassionate view of war" & says the lack of identification "argues against attaching an anti-French or antiwar interpretation to the series"!  A prima facie reading of the caption verses for example, gives an alls well that ends well absolutist story, but I think there's more to it than that. I think both sides need to be put. I think the current name is right - 2nd choice would be Les Ms & Malheurs ....  Has the Goya been put up? I'll check - yes, but they are 3 days apart. Cheers Johnbod (talk) 01:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Re Dutch. I figured you probably had an informed reason for excluding some (and of course how much on Commons can be taken for granted...). Anyway, I think having the artists first in the captions is a useful approach in an overview article, which was my main reason for digging in. That is a very nice article. Here, it is late summer (early autumn?) light and the fields look like Golden Age paintings to me. Outriggr (talk) 04:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, there's hardly an original name for a Dutch painting around. It was Ms Trip's sister (according to a family tree on the web) who was married to Balthazar Coynmans, not her, but who knows. He was until recently thought to be the subject of a famous Hals (very different in style ) but it is now established it was a distant & equally rich cousin of the same name. Landscape titles are totally random.  I'm very pleased with it, but I'm going to try to avoid any other big ones for a while. Johnbod (talk) 11:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...
... for the kind words. Bye! Ling.Nut (talk) 07:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

... for the excellent job on the Gniezno Doors! --C. Trifle (talk) 20:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC) ...Yes, I do but I live 250 km from there. I contacted the Custodian today. He'll have a look. Happy New Year!--C. Trifle (talk) 14:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi Johnbod, thank you for taking the time to review the Quiriguá FA nom. Many thanks, Simon Burchell (talk) 15:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Really
Robert Hughes is good enough for me, though I had to take leave of my smelling salts after reading the passage. I'm working off only the Hughes anthology and Connell for the moment, but heading into a good book store in the morning. Less of the sarky edit summaries though about spelling, like; I'm very sensitive;. Thanks though, Its great to watch you work. Ceoil (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Judith and Holofernes
Hi Johnbod, thanks for your edit--I'm working on this article and need all the help I can get: I know literature better than I know the visual arts. Please keep an eye out (if you can) and correct me if I embarass myself or anyone else. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll keep an eye on it - I'm intending to do Power of Women one day - I don't know what a google search with Judith might throw up. Johnbod (talk) 20:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Jesus College buildings FAC
Digging around on JSTOR, I've found this, after listing various Gothic 1630s Oxford buildings including the Jesus chapel window: "It has been questioned whether this was the result of Gothic Survival-that is Gothic was the only style known to the fellows and their craftsmen-or Revival-that is the fellows deliberately chose Gothic rather than Classical. It seems clear that the latter is the case." Now to read the rest of the article, understand it and cite it! I'll get there gradually. BencherliteTalk 22:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Was there supposed to be a link there? I have stuff I can add on that. Eg in 1624 the fellows of St John's Cantab explained their choice of Gothic to the bishop who had donated the money for a new library:"men of judgement liked best the old fashion of church windows, holding it the most meet for such a building". Until the Sheldonian, there were only a few neo-classical doorways in Oxford, and less at Cambridge. Famously, the ChCh hall stairs (1640) are wholly Baroque in form, but wholly Perpendicular in decoration. Johnbod (talk) 22:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Here it is. It's now been added to the article.  When you get a chance, can you take another look at it and the FAC, to see how things are coming along?  Thanks, BencherliteTalk 15:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for The Disasters of War

 * Oh, thanks Ceoil! Johnbod (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Dutch Golden Age painting

 * Oh, bravo! Well done. - PKM (talk) 01:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 01:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Its a visual feist, but where is that gallery of bits and pieces you promised. Ceoil (talk) 06:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've got 2 pics in the main text, so i think I need to collect more puns. Johnbod (talk) 15:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I would like to see some of the paintings with bird puns... Möchtest du mit mir vögeln? is still current slang in Germany today.  Litho  derm  18:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The Hunter's Gift is my favourite - last in the genre painting section. There are also a number set in markets, somewhat alone the lines of the time years ago when the woman in front of me, buying mangos in Rupert Street market, told the stallholder she only liked "the big African ones", which he repeated to me with a solemn face. I'd better add a note.Johnbod (talk) 18:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You dog. In other news, I've taken the Goya to PR; in the unlikely event that it recieves attention, could you keep an eye. I think we are near there for FAC at this stage, the famine and Inquisition sections need to be grown yet, but I have the Huges bio now, and that is relatively easy work. However, the process is not something I could take on on my own, would you give a hand. Ceoil (talk) 21:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure Johnbod (talk) 23:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Johnbod, as always your work on the page has been exemplarily. Ceoil (talk) 02:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

A small correction (and a murky affair)
Re your last comment in the deletion discussion, the categories Bevagna and Trevi existed long before Francesco Betti Sorbelli came on the scene: they were created by Bill Thayer, one of the best writers we have had on Italian subjects ancient and modern, back in October 2004.

My suspicion is that the anonymous nomination for deletion was somehow related to the anonymous user who, through various IPs (including this one), previously conducted a ‘bizarre vendetta’ against him (see this edit for an example) and on more than one occasion depopulated the categories (see these edits for example) in order that they should be deleted.

Of course the putative motives of the nominator—and the matter of who created the categories—were entirely irrelevant to the question of whether the categories should exist and no doubt the decision that was made was perfectly defensible. Ian Spackman (talk) 00:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks - I was of course unaware of all this. I think the others were created by Sorbelli though? I still think it was right to delete them - they seem to be the only categories for such small Italian places. Johnbod (talk) 15:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Inventors of categories seem not to understand that a category's actual use is as an index. A volume with a couple of indices is more usable than one with fourteen. Proliferated categories are just inflations of lists. If, for a start, they were all entered discreetly at the bottom of the page, then competitions for smallest possible category might be toned down. --Wetman (talk) 17:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Move of Seal (emblem)
Pursuant to WP:CONSENSUS, this is a cordial request that you please undo your recent move of Seal (emblem), which was made without regard to the recent discussion and consensus, and without any prior discussion on the article's talk page. Wilhelm Meis (Quatsch!) 10:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I was unaware of that discussion, and as my move summary said, based my move on the recent Cfd discussion. I still remain of the view that "emblem" is an unacceptably poor disambiguator - seals often show emblems, but are not emblems themselves, and very many seals do not show emblems at all.  I think it might be better to take it back to WP:MOVE. Now I read the discussion on the talk page, I was interested to see that you also came up with what I think is my preferred name: Seal (authentification), which was later supported by Timurite.  This is the only term I can see that covers adequately all seals, and both the impression and the device.  Modern company and legal seals, Chinese "chop" seals and historical Jewish and Egyptian seals are among the many types of seals that normally just use inscriptions (ie text).  I think the discussion concentrated way too much on heraldry, a very localized aspect of the matter in my view.  Somewhat by coincidence, I have just been working on Engraved gem, the major expression of the seal as an art form in the Western tradition, from the 14th century BC to the 19th century AD.  Few of their very varied designs can really be called emblems.   Johnbod (talk) 14:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You have a message at User talk:Wilhelm meis14:18, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Question about notaries and seals
Since you seem to have an interest in notaries and seals, perhaps you can help me. I am interested in figuring out whether an American notary public (excluding American civil notaries such as Louisiana notaries) have the authority (if asked to do so by the document signer) to apply their seals to every page in a multi-page document. The aim would be to make it more difficult to substitute a page with different contents after the notarization ocurrs, and to satisfy the foreign governments that require this security measure.

This all supposes that the document is otherwise eligible for notarization, and with the understanding that any such answer will only apply to most states, since each state writes its own laws concerning notarization. This is a topic of discussion on various US notary forums, such as the one at http://www.notaryrotary.com (select the notary talk tab and search with the orange button for message no. 303594). --Jc3s5h (talk) 17:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, way too detailed for me! Try the talk page. In Europe, this is never normally done. Their seal goes over & fixes cord etc which binds the document together through a punch hole, and they only normally actually mark (other than the punch hole) only their notarization, which is a separate page (pages if a translation is included) at the front of the document. I have no experience of what happens in the US. Johnbod (talk) 17:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Jesus College buildings FAC (2)
I've now returned from my travels back to my workplace, to find JJN's book waiting for me (on his 80th birthday, by chance) along with a 1930s Betjeman number. I've added some material from them, and some further architectural detail from the Royal Commission description, as well as a few more photographs where Flickr users have relicensed on request - I've been able to get some shots of architectural details, such as the chapel doorway and the shell-hood of the lodgings. Would you mind returning to the FAC when you get a chance, and updating your views? Thanks, BencherliteTalk 17:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Fantastic. BencherliteTalk 23:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

For all you do...
Oh, thanks! Johnbod (talk) 23:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

60K today!
WOW...Modernist (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Whee, now I am indeed a twirly (do you know the joke?). Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Do tell...  Ty  11:46, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Supposedly (for non-Brits - you get a free bus pass at 60, or is it 65?, for use after 9.30 am) bus drivers/conductors call senior cits "twirlies", because they keep saying "Am I twirly, am I twirly?" (too early). A favourite of my father. Johnbod (talk) 11:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I hadn't heard it, but I like it. LOL.  Ty  05:12, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, Johnbod! Although 60,000 is the new 30,000, or something. Cheers, JNW (talk) 13:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Engraved gem
Hello! Your submission of Engraved gem at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 02:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Notification
Hi Johnbod. I'm posting to let you know that your name has been mentioned on a list of potential candidates for adminship on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running, or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. decltype (talk) 20:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Marlborough gem
Essentially a footnoted footnote to Engraved gem. I hope you'll look it over.--Wetman (talk) 11:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * O excellent!--Wetman (talk) 17:40, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Likewise! There must be a pic somewhere, did you see it is currently "on loan"? Johnbod (talk) 17:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No I missed that; I think it isn't in Monaco any more. I added a ftnote on the Marlborough Antinous, and, further revolving about the sun of your Engraved gems: Antonio Maria Zanetti.--Wetman (talk) 15:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Engraved gem

 * I've also received this gratifying notification, which I didn't deserve: you are quick to share credit, John. I've just now come up this, through JSTOR, which I think you can access too: David Jaffé, "Aspects of Gem Collecting in the Early Seventeenth Century, Nicolas-Claude Peiresc and Lelio Pasqualini", The Burlington Magazine 135 No. 1079 (February 1993:103-120). Great detail add up to an atmospheric view.--Wetman (talk) 16:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I can only read (sometimes) the first pages on JSTOR, which often gives tantalizing glimpses, but no more. Until the last couple of years there were only 2 UK subscribers to JSTOR, although I can get (with some messing about) Grove at home through the local library. Johnbod (talk) 16:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Dutch Golden Age painting
Hi John, I came across the above for the first time today, after someone linked to it in a discussion, and I just wanted to say that it's superb, a real pleasure to read. It has almost restored my faith in Wikipedia. :) SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 08:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks indeed! I rashly promised User:Ceoil & Outriggr a mini-galley of visual sex puns, which I suppose will be the crowning glory.... Johnbod (talk) 13:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Tp, tap, tap. Ceoil (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Interesting article...
Anglo-Saxon hoard found Ealdgyth - Talk 22:13, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, the Staffordshire hoard Johnbod (talk) 01:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Venaria
Hi John! How are you? I've just consistently expanded Reggia of Venaria, and perhaps it would need some copyediting of my mediocre English! Thanks and good works. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 08:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I also added Amedeo di Castellamonte and Carlo di Castellamonte (upcoming as I'm writing) which could need your precious help. Grazie ancora. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 09:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Minnesota Meetup
 2009 Details under discussion. Please share this with anyone who may be interested.  Jonathunder (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Desco da parto
What? No Wikipedia article on deschi da parto?--Wetman (talk) 18:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

List of most expensive paintings
You changed "This is a list of the highest known prices paid for paintings." to "This is a list of the highest known prices paid for paintings since 1987." I deleted "from 1987" since it gave the wrong impression that we're only listing paintings that have been sold since 1987. Back in 2006/7 I worked on a (n unfinished) progressive list of most expensive paintings at any time, and, if my memory serves me well, Yasuo Goto's purchase of some sunflowers tripled the existing record. So, that interpretation would be wrong. You say "that's not the point", but I can't see another way to interpret the sentence as you've written it. Afasmit (talk) 01:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We have both edited it since, & I hope are both happy with the result. I am contemplating what I think should be a separate article - not I think a list - on the earlier history of record prices, going back to the 18th century.  It's a pity the article doesn't have more references. Johnbod (talk) 14:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:Academics by subject & Category:Scholars by subject
there is  a discussion of merging these rather complicated categories  Categories for discussion/Log/2009 September 29 You made a suggestion back in 2007 that is now being discussed.  DGG ( talk ) 23:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Your feedback needed ...
... at Talk:History_of_Mysore_and_Coorg_(1565–1760). Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  01:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

RfC to increase the default thumbnail size of images
Johnbod, you've been active there; a new section for supports and opposes has been started. You may wish to voice your opinion. Tony  (talk)  08:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Addition of unsourced material
You recently added unsourced material to the article Van Morrison: No Surrender. Please do not add unsourced material to articles, instead please provide a cite to a secondary WP:RS/WP:V source when adding material. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 03:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I added a cite. Please be more careful in the future not to add unsourced info to articles. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 03:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Bullshit! Please don't write articles on topics you don't really understand. Johnbod (talk) 04:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please be civil. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 05:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Johnbod, I understand that you feel you have some knowledge on the subject matter, and that perhaps you feel that allows you to add in information that you think is obvious and does not require a source. But all information in an article should be cited to verifiable sources, and those sources should exist as references in the article itself. I apologize if I came off short to you in my initial comment, I just think that all information in the article should be appropriately sourced in the article itself, even if it is explained adequately in another article. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 06:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cirt, you took this too far, and effectively baited and rubbed it in. Please be more careful in the future not to add unsourced info to articles. How smug. What kind of a reaction did you expect (I think I know the answear). Ceoil (talk) 01:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

It's all over - I was a bit snappy. Let's leave it at that. Johnbod (talk) 01:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * @, yes, please see my apology above. @, thank you very much and I value your contributions, again I apologize and I hope we can both work constructively together in the future. Cirt (talk) 02:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: I have struck out the above comments, as a show of good faith. See and . :) Cirt (talk)

Peace dove
 Cirt (talk) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!


 * To reiterate, sorry about the above conflict. Here is hoping we can interact positively, constructively, politely and hopefully even kindly towards one another in the future. I will strive to do my part in this endeavor. :) Cheers, Cirt (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the last of these with later posts. I agree absolutely. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 16:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :) Cirt (talk) 20:00, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

London Transport brand DYK
I've suggested a second DYK alt for this. Simply south (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Beauty and Ugliness
Cross posting link - On the history of ugliness. Ceoil (talk) 00:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to push the Goya series. I would appreciate it very much if you kept a watch over the FAC. Ceoil (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure! Johnbod (talk) 18:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Muiredach's High Cross
When you revert edits that have an edit summary that says ref fix(Tag: section blanking), make sure that your reversion does not simply recreate a problem that has been fixed. SmackBot has a habit of adding to some pages that have. This causes every reference to immediately report a cite error. The only way to repair the error is to remove the. I did, then had to redo it after you undid my repair. 75.69.0.58 (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, sorry, I can see this now. Have you raised this with the bot? They should be able to remove this bug. Especially from an ISP, the edit diff looked like straightforward vandalism, I'm afraid.  They often use misleading summaries. Johnbod (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I did that here. 75.69.0.58 (talk) 17:07, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Just in case....
Urse d'Abetot is my next FAC. Nothing I've turned up shows that he did anything remotely like artistic patronage, except building Worcester Castle, which doesn't exist any more. Just checking in case you know of something that I've missed, artistic or otherwise. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Political history of Mysore and Coorg FAC
All the issues (except additional alt-text that I will be adding in bits and pieces during the day) have now been dealt with. I welcome further comments from you at the FAC review or on the article talk page. Thanks! Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  14:50, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've being seeing stuff happen, so haven't reviewed the changes. I'll do so in the next few days. Johnbod (talk) 16:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Allegory of Painting edits
One reason I had a separate (admittedly, really small) section on the "Similarity with the Art of Painting" was because I wanted to leave space for other illustrations in the iconography section. Wheelock's book has pictures from the two emblem books I mention in the text which show very strongly how Vermeer took elements from them and put them in the painting. If I can find those images online, I'll copy them that way, otherwise I'll try to use my scanner to get the images right off my copy of Wheelock's book. Also, there's more information to put in that iconography section from other works (I just haven't had the time until this weekend).

One fun thing I've noticed is that Walter Liedtke of the Metropolitan Museum of Art is pretty blunt in criticizing Wheelock's judgments about this painting and The Milkmaid, so I may include some of that in a "Critical reception" section. Both experts are supposed to appear at a panel discussion at the museum in early November, and I think I might show up to see the fireworks. CountryDoctor (talk) 13:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Moved & replied to at article talk. Johnbod (talk) 13:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

G'Day!
Owyagoinmate? You're up late tonight! It's middayish here and time I got off the computer and went shopping. There's nothing left to eat except Weetbix, Vegemite, Rosella tomato sauce and Golden Gircle Pineapple juice, all icons of the Australian cuisine. Seeya!
 * Amandajm (talk) 01:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re changing a quote, the translator obviously got it wrong. We're planning on being in England in the not-so-distant future. If you're anywhere near London we could possibly meet up. Amandajm (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * a) I don't see why - use of H is very variable. b) That would be great. I'll look for your e-mail. Johnbod (talk) 10:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Where is that e-mail button? Do you have an address set up here? Johnbod (talk) 10:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

French articles on Dutch painters
For your information: Watch this Wikipedian , he translates from Dutch into French, and adds a lot information too. Taksen (talk) 13:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, interesting, though his Hercules Seghers shows borrowing from English WP too. Johnbod (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Hallo Johnbod, may be you like this drawing too. It was added yesterday to Gerard de Lairesse on the French Wikipedia. The other ones are a bit weird, but very, very precise.

http://web2.bium.univ-paris5.fr/livanc/?cote=ms00026&p=1&do=page

May be you can add something to Lorenzo Magalotti? You might find something interesting his trip to the Netherlands and England. Regards Taksen (talk) 04:44, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Quick request
If you have time to have a look at Buildings of Nuffield College, Oxford, I'd be grateful for any thoughts you have. Obviously it's not as long as the Jesus College article, as there's rather less history. It's not mentioned, surprisingly, in the JJN book you made me buy for my last FAC... No rush. Regards, BencherliteTalk 23:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I "made you buy"!! Merely a thought! Anyway, done, & unexpectedly interesting. Remove my additions if you don't like - finding a skyline picture was unexpectedly difficult, & I'm afraid there seems to be nothing better on Commons - I couldn't trace it in any of the panoramas from Boar's Hill. Johnbod (talk) 18:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, and sorry not to say so earlier. With your improvements and a couple of tweaks from Malleus, I think it's worth a shot at FAC now.  Regards, BencherliteTalk 11:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I quoted you in my nomination statement at Featured article candidates/Buildings of Nuffield College, Oxford/archive1, incidentally! BencherliteTalk 11:54, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:MLA
Can I add a link to our special exhibition on an artist or subject, or mention it in the text? shouldn't be under "Article subjects". This seems more link a new topic on External links. Article subjects should be only for determining if an article should exist under a certain title. I'll take a break and let you edit for awhile so we stop conflicting with each other. --UncleDouggie (talk) 00:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I like the more detailed breakdown. If you keep rolling up, you can make the whole page go away and just reference other things. These are newbies we're talking to. Let them tell us that it's too detailed. You seem to coming at this from the point of what is done today while my take is to cover how we want things to be done in the future, including having far more MLA contributions than we do today. Just because a few people navigated the minefields in the past doesn't mean we can take it as a given that everyone will be so fortunate. If that was the case, the page wouldn't even be needed. --UncleDouggie (talk) 00:58, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I claim that an MLA institution can be a third-party source, which you seem to have supported by discussing a work published in an exhibition catalogue. Do you agree? If so, what's unclear about the words? --UncleDouggie (talk) 03:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I see the problem now. I rewrote the section. Please check it. --UncleDouggie (talk) 04:23, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed it again and added an additional question to the end of the "editing" section. --UncleDouggie (talk) 00:43, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Ciao
Ciao! Ive just finished expanding abd ar-Rahman III to a decent status. As usual, it'd need some cleanup as my English is not that good. Can you help? Thanks much in advance and have fun.... --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 10:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Question and possibly useful images for your work
Hi, Johnbod. Since you're working on fine art related articles, and sometime obtained permissions for images from Victoria and Albert Museum, I wonder whether these image set taken from VAM could be useful for any existent articles or possibly new articles. Except two, the images from Flickr have not been uploaded yet, but I've got the permission to upload any of them from the photographer. However, I don't know what their name of the objects would be, but your experties are lied in fine art, so if you pick any useful ones among them, that would be great. Do you know what this is? Thanks.--Caspian blue 14:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how you'd describe the last thing! The great problem with museum/art photos is knowing what the objects are in sufficient detail. I only recognise a few of these. Commons is full of photos that are hard to use because the details of descriptions/dates/materials/place of origin are not there. Perhaps you should repeat this message at the V&A page. If you upload the following to Commons, putting them in  or the relevant sub-cat (sculptures etc), they will probably be useful  - or you could upload the lot. My picks would be:02-07, 22,13,10,45,44,31,27,29,24.  Let me know here if you upload & I can add what info & other categories I know. Thanks Johnbod (talk) 15:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will leave a message to the VAM page for inquiry. However, I don't know how to name the images, so I wanted to identify them. I'm gonna just name them 1, 2, 3....like that. After done on uploading, I will let you know.--Caspian blue 17:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Make sure you have the photographer change the license to allow commercial use, so that they don't fail Flickr review on Commons.  Litho  derm  19:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, Johnbod. I finished uploading with commonist, so would you add descriptions to images? Thanks!--Caspian blue 13:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Steven van Herwijck
Medallists and gem engravers seem to be up your alley; can you add anything to Steven van Herwijck? (There are some rather incoherent notes on the theory that the works of Steven van der Meulen should rather be attributed to van Herwijck in my talk.) - PKM (talk) 21:04, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know too much about individuals I'm afraid, & I couldn't add to this, except for a comment, I'll make at talk. Johnbod (talk) 18:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Vote Re CC origins and historians differing POV's
Hello Johnbod, sorry to bother you but we are having a vote on the Catholic Church page regarding whether or not to include the dispute among historians regarding the Church origins. Can you please come an give us your vote so we can come to consensus? Vote is taking place here Thanks!  Nancy Heise    talk  01:19, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had to oppose on this, for the reasons I gave there. I'm afraid I've given up following the endless wrangles at RCC on a regular basis. Hope you're well! Don't let it get you down. Johnbod (talk) 18:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Deleting Damien Hirst
I do not understand why you deleted my image of Damien Hirst's sculpture on the Wallace Collection page just because it is a temporary exhibit there. Peter Clarke 19:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It would have had to have gone in a few weeks anyway, as misleading, & had no indication it was only temporary. I have added it to Damien Hirst. Why does it not appear in his Commons category, despite having the cat on the file? Very odd.  Johnbod (talk) 19:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

invitation
Can you please come here and discuss. Thanks.  Nancy Heise    talk  06:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Halo pic
what was wrong with it? or did you just want to keep the old pic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DinoClutch (talk • contribs) 13:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's less interesting, & not a very good picture, I thought. Johnbod (talk) 13:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. The current picture is just not that beautiful, imo. What about a pic of child Jesus?DinoClutch (talk) 13:46, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think everyone knows what a basic halo looks like, & its more interesting to have a less typical example. The Masaccio illustrates its type beautifully, & is an important work in art history. Johnbod (talk) 13:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay. The old pic isn't too bad, keeping it is fine with me.DinoClutch (talk) 13:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. Johnbod (talk) 14:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

FA review, thanks
Greetings Johnbod, just thought you might like to know, the Boeing 777 article has been edited to reflect the suggestions you made on the article's FA review page. Any further comments on those changes, or suggestions in general, are most welcome. Thanks again for your assistance. Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 20:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * just commented there. Thxs. Johnbod (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hummmph!
I'm cross about the picture size thing! I was told that this was the way to fix the problems. I'm sorry it doesn't work! Unfortunately I've been through a couple of other articles and made the same sort of changes, under the impression it was the right thing to do! OK, I'll fix it, (if you haven't already) but not tonight (YAWN!) as it's the wee small hours already and I've only just got around to this page. Toodle-oo!Amandajm (talk) 14:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Categories for discussion/Log/2009 October 20
This CfD has genarated a lot of talk but only one vote. Nor has anyone proposed an alternative to my proposal. Please read and consider voting. Thanks. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 15:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

There's been a few improvements...
I invite you to revisit Aaron Krach to see how THIS has been much improved. It has gone though a complete rewrite and numerous sources have been added. Might you offer any suggestions for further cleanup? Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ouch!
Are those editors really dead ? Sandy Georgia (Talk) 15:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I hope not of course - User:Irishguy is retired. Johnbod (talk) 22:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just checking :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

advice for the cultural sector
Many thanks! I'm very interested to see what becomes of the initiative & you can be sure I'll stay around on the page (in fact I'm afraid I just raised a number of queries on the glossary bit....). Well done for pushing this! Johnbod (talk) 01:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)