User talk:Venicescapes/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Venicescapes, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Johnbod (talk) 10:45, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the input. Venicescapes (talk) 15:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

User name
Hi, Nice to see your user page turn blue, but "corporate" accounts are not allowed for legal reasons. See this section of our policy. I presume only one person has in fact used the account so far? You must keep it that way, & should change the user page to reflect this. Any other individuals should each set up a different account. Johnbod (talk) 10:45, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

You are correct that only one person is using the account. Venicescapes (talk) 14:23, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks (see above for signing talk pages with 4 tildes) Johnbod (talk) 11:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps you can provide some assistance. I made an update on the talk page without being logged in. Is it possible to delete the IP? Also, is it necessary to change the username? If so, how? Thank you in advance for any guidance.Venicescapes (talk) 12:07, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd just sign the talk page post now. Keeping the username should be ok - technically perhaps not, but.... It was identifying it as an organization that creates a problem. You could start a new one saying "I used to edit as User:Venicescapes" on the user page. Actually renaming the account is fiddly, & probably more trouble than it is worth. See WP:UNC Johnbod (talk) 12:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the input. Venicescapes (talk) 15:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Venicescapes - I've suppressed the IP information from the edit for you. It will no longer appear in the edit history of the page.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Hello. Thank you again for your assistance. On the Marciana page, I was wondering if it would be appropriate to add some information about the dispute (among architectural historians) with regard to the intended length of the building.  Also, in the exterior section that you wrote, would it be a good idea to discuss Sansovino's vaunted solution to the Vitruvian problem of the half-metope? Venicescapes (talk) 10:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, fine - the first maybe in its own section at the bottom, unless very short. Maybe the other two. Really this sort of article-specific talk should be on the article talk page rather than here. I'll copy it there & let's continue there if we need to. Johnbod (talk)

Your message to me
Hi Venicescapes! I hope that you're doing well and that you're having a pleseant day! :-) I was looking through my user space and noticed that you had left me a message here about 25 days ago (you accidentally left it in the wrong place instead of my user talk page). I just wanted to let you know that I received it, and that you're very welcome for the help. If you need any more help, please don't hesitate to message me by clicking here and let me know. Just make sure that you follow the directions and do it correctly this time. :-P I'm joking of course; it's no big deal at all. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:46, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Update
Hi, I finally looked at the Loggetta, sorry for the delay, & commented there. I hope you will resume on the mint. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 15:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Hello. I'm glad that all is well.  Thank you for taking a look and adding the photos and details.  I haven't been inside in years and don't remember it well.  I believe that Sansovino's statue of the Virgin (originally in the loggia) is now either in the Diocesan museum or the Basilica.  I'll do some research.  Yes, I would like to do some work on the Mint.  I hope to have some time this autumn.  I'll keep you informed.  Have a nice day.Venicescapes (talk) 16:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Johnbod I added a diagram of the square on the Marciana page that might be of interest to you for other pages.Venicescapes (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Good morning. I added an infobox that covers the Marciana both as an institution and as a building, but I'm not sure if it was created correctly.  The "V" and "T" in the bottom right are red.  Could you offer any guidance?Venicescapes (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Johnbod If the UK spelling is preferred, should not the following also be changed: patronised, honour, favour, characterised, popularised, theatre, sensationalised, honour, immortalised, archaeological, civilisation, harmonises, organised, characterised, organising?Venicescapes (talk) 09:05, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * We should be doing this, as article-specific stuff, on the talk page there really. I'll copy & respond there. Also please link to articles you talk about, to save me or others having to type the name to get there. Johnbod (talk) 14:26, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Floods
Are you there? It must be awful. Hope things not too bad, Best Johnbod (talk) 14:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Johnbod Thank you for asking. The city is recovering slowly. Most of the stores at Rialto were open this morning, although a few were still cleaning. I was surprised at how quickly shops became operational. Getting around the city is a different matter. Several of the boat landings are closed. The wind was so strong that it ripped the gangways off. A few vaporetto that were tied up for the night sunk. One was actually pushed against the Arsenal landing and is now wedged between the landing and the wharf.  A number of trees were uprooted on Sant'Elena, and the brick wall near the Biennale was literally tossed onto the street. They already have inspectors verifying if anything else might fall: there were several men on the roof of the Doge's Palace checking the crenellations.

The Marciana is closed due to water damage to the electric and internet lines. The Querini apparently suffered considerable damage and is also closed. Most concern is focused on the Basilica. The damage is long-term as the salt seeps upwards, corroding the stone and weakening the mosaics from behind. They just spent a considerable amount of money to "protect" the narthex from flooding... but to no avail.Venicescapes (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Very nasty. You might be interested in this talk section. Johnbod (talk) 17:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
Johnbod Greetings from Venice. Thank you for the holiday wishes. The image is stunning. My very best wishes to you for the holiday period.Venicescapes (talk) 15:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Creator Template
Johnbod Hello and Happy New Year. I'm getting ready to put the roundels on the Marciana page but have a few problems to resolve. One is the creation of a template for Giovanni Demio. All of the other artists already have a template. I found this page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Creator. But I really don't understand how to proceed. Where am I supposed to publish this template? At one point, the page mentions "you can click on "preload a creator template"", but I don't see this link anywhere. Do you have any experience? Thank you for any guidance.Venicescapes (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Personally I think we have too many of these. There's really no need. I've never created one myself. None of his works seem to have their own articles. Johnbod (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod Ok. How are things with you?Venicescapes (talk) 05:50, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fine thanks - still away at the moment. I see there's been more floods. English weather doesn't look so bad these days, Best, Johnbod (talk) 19:36, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Biblioteca Marciana
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Biblioteca Marciana you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yakikaki -- Yakikaki (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yakikaki Thank you very much for your time and willingness to review the article.Venicescapes (talk) 10:16, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Biblioteca Marciana
The article Biblioteca Marciana you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Biblioteca Marciana for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yakikaki -- Yakikaki (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * This is perhaps a bit silly but I really do think you deserve a medal for your hard work, impressive knowledge and kind and civil tone. I hope to see many more articles by you in the future. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yakikaki Actually, it's quite cool. I'll add it to my talk page. Thank you.Venicescapes (talk) 06:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Eventual feature article
Johnbod Greetings from Venice. I hope that all is well. Carnival is currently raging. So, I've retreated inside to escape the revelry.

I have a personal question. I'm still waiting for the Biblioteca Marciana to be considered for "Good article", but I'm already starting to think about what might be necessary to get it to "A" or even "FA". I noticed your name on a list of volunteers for Peer Review. But since you've worked on the article, I'm not sure if you can take an official look. If not, might you know of anyone specific?Venicescapes (talk) 18:44, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay replying & I hope all is well. "Retreating inside" was maybe a good move. Actually I rarely do Peer Reviews, & had forgotten my name was on the list. The trouble is not many others do them. I'd stick it up there - with luck you will get comments on structure, formatting etc. You might try the VA project - I think the architecture one is rather moribund. There isn't really an "A" class except for military history. Peer Review won't I think mind it not being a GA yet. There are often more responses for serious stuff (like this) than pop culture, & there's not much up at the moment.  Johnbod (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod Evviva! I was getting worried.  I'm glad you're well.  We have survived carnival, but the city is now largely closed for health concerns … basically all public places.  The Marciana was reviewed for Good Article status. It's a rather long review, and I'm slowly working through it.  If you have any thoughts or ideas, please let me know.Venicescapes (talk) 14:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod Thanks for looking at GA review and for the guidance.Venicescapes (talk) 17:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod Thanks for the guidance on the question of splitting the article. I shall proceed. I agree that it was good to say upfront that the building is Sansovino's masterpiece. I had included the footnote from Howard to back it up. We'll see what the reviewer responds.Venicescapes (talk) 18:38, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * JohnbodHello. I hope you can help. Do you by chance have the 1987 edition of Hartt's book? I wanted to check the quote that is cited in the lead of the Marciana (supposed to be on page 633 in that edition). The library doesn't have the 1987 edition, but it's closed at any rate (as is most everything else in the city). I checked the 2011 edition on-line but couldn't find it.Venicescapes (talk) 19:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Well I added it a year or so ago from my copy, so it will be right. 24 years is a long time for what used to be a key textbook, no doubt often changed around. Johnbod (talk) 19:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod Thank you. How is everything?Venicescapes (talk) 08:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok-ish, thanks! Congrats on getting the GA! Johnbod (talk) 02:46, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod I sensed that things were, as you say, ok-ish. I hope things get brighter soon. Are you working on any articles right now?
 * Well they aren't that bad, but the weather's been filthy (though I'm nowhere near floods) and there are at least 2 COVID 19 cases within 2-7 miles of me .... I've been mostly working on our neglected & highly-read articles on Indian art for the last year or so, & just started an infrequent new article at Daulat (Mughal painter). Mostly I just improve existing articles. I would put BM up at peer review - you might or might not get much, but usually the reviewers are very experienced. The subject may well attract them. Johnbod (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2020 (UTC)


 * It's grey here too. Thanks for the guidance.  I'll post it at PR, and we'll see what happens.Venicescapes (talk) 14:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for all of your help and guidance in getting the Marciana up to GA. If you have specific ideas to get it to FA, please let me know. Also, on the Marciana talk page, it's rated as "B" by the various projects. Do I need to change that, or does it change automatically at some point?Venicescapes (talk) 06:47, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod Hello, I hope that everything is going well for you. Here, we're still in limbo. Not much is open … really bad for a city that depends on tourism.

I put the Marciana up for a Peer Review after doing a few more tweaks. We'll see what the recommendations are.Venicescapes (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll watchlist that. Best, Johnbod (talk) 00:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Checking In
Johnbod Greeings from sunny, yet deserted Venice. I'm just checking in to see how you are. Have you been working on anything particular?Venicescapes (talk) 17:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm fine thanks. It's all French ceramics at the moment - see my user page, which I always keep up to date for what I'm working on. That and the garden; it's raining now or I'd be out there. How about you? There are loads of small Venice buildings articles (well nearly all of them) that would be quick to upgrade without needing a library (I'd imagine).  Johnbod (talk) 17:16, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod I'm glad to hear that you're able to get outside (when it's not raining). We're allowed to stroll, but within 200 meters.  We can go to the nearest stores for basic needs. All in all, it's starting to feel oppressive. The restrictions are supposed to be lightened at the beginning of May. I'm doing some limited research on-line for a publication. But I really need to get to the libraries. I suspect, however, that they will be among the last places to reopen. I did look at a few other articles on Wiki. The bell tower is sad. I'm not sure how they can consider Doge Pietro Tribuno to be the architect. The article on the whole square is actually poor IMO. Do any articles strike you as being more in need?Venicescapes (talk) 08:55, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry - thought I'd replied. None specifically. As I said above, there are dozens of Venice building articles that could easily be greatly improved by adding a couple of paras of architectural details, and often photos. As elsewhere, most of our articles concentrate on the "history" & lack informed architectural info. Often they were done years ago & there are now many more & better photos. There may well be some churches & palazzi we still don't have at all; probably loads in the terraferma. When doing Venetian Renaissance architecture, I found the redlink here:

Michele Sanmicheli (1484–1559) from Verona in the terraferma, trained further south, and on his return to Verona in 1527 was hired by the state as a military architect. Most of his work was fortifications and military or naval buildings around the Venetian territories, especially in Verona, but he also built a number of palaces that are very original, and take Venetian architecture into Mannerism. His work in Verona represents a group of buildings defining the city in a way comparable to Palladio's in Vicenza. The Palazzo Bevilacqua in Verona (begun 1529) is the most famous of these. - We have at least 1 photo.

Also: Giorgio Spavento (active from 1489 or before, d. 1509)

Are you still limited to 200m? Best, Johnbod (talk) 00:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Hello! I’m glad that you’re well. I was concerned. We end our quarantine next week. So I should be able to get out and enjoy the city … at least a little. The libraries should reopen at the end of May. I might look into Giorgio Spavento.


 * What’s 200m?


 * I made the huge mistake of putting the Procuratie up for Good Article review. An editor got involved and, last night, in a matter of hours basically turned the whole page upside down.  I had worked long and hard on that article: weeks of research at the Marciana, the university, and the archives as well as hours to create diagrams ad hoc and take photos. So it’s very disconcerting.  Some of the terminology is now inaccurate; some sentences no longer make sense. Also, minutia that I had placed in notes for higher-interest readers is now scattered. Some appears in the main text (which bogs down the reading), some in a new note section she created, and some in citations. Most of the images were moved and now overlap with other sections. One of the images even pushes down into the notes section, moving it far to the right.  I really wish she had had the courtesy to inquire about my rationale before intervening to such an extent. The damage is too extensive to fix. So I’ll wash my hands of it and withdraw the nomination for Good Article.  If the editor does something similar to the Marciana, I’m going to be …….Venicescapes (talk) 08:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Just an update. She was very apologetic, and we're working through it.Venicescapes (talk) 13:56, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've been keeping an eye on it. I expect there will be a happy ending - let me know if I can help/comment. Image placement does vary a lot on different screens.  200m = 200 metres. Johnbod (talk) 16:42, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Marciana peer review
Johnbod Good Morning. Just to let you know that someone started the peer review for the Marciana in case you want to follow along. It looks promising.Venicescapes (talk) 10:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod What's RS?Venicescapes (talk) 14:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * From where? WP:RS? Johnbod (talk) 14:29, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod OK. Thank you.Venicescapes (talk) 14:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Santa Maria del Canneto (Pula, Croatia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pola ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Santa_Maria_del_Canneto_%28Pula%2C_Croatia%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Santa_Maria_del_Canneto_%28Pula%2C_Croatia%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:05, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

A few thoughts
Johnbod Good morning. I hope you're doing well. I had a few things I wanted to ask you about "off the record". Hence I'm on my talk page. First, I started to do some work on the bell tower. I've added a paragraph on the origin of the tower and made a graphic to help. But I need to get to the library to be able to go any further. There seems to be quite a bit of trivia on the page. It's not very 'encyclopedic'. I noticed on the guidance for FAC (not that I'm thinking about FAC for the bell tower) that trivia is frowned upon. They specifically mentioned sections labeled "In popular culture". Do you think that all of that should just be removed? It's almost all uncited anyway.

On another matter, back in September 2019, you had started to change the spelling on the Marciana from American to British but then changed back. As you know, the question of the spelling was raised again by the individual who is doing the peer review. You noted that the article began in American English. But there were never any ENGVAR points, and in reality there's virtually nothing left of that article. You and I are the top editors and have contributed roughly 96 percent. I'm wondering if your initial inclination was right, i.e. that it should be in British English. My reasoning is that the citation system I've used (MHRA) is a British system; the article is about a European library; and you and I are both in Europe. The words that stand out are centre, colour, and programme. Your thoughts?

Third item. When you type just "Antonio Maria Zan" in your search box, do you get Antonio Maria Zanneti AND Antonio Maria Zanetti (the younger) as suggestions?Venicescapes (talk) 10:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Update. The small neighborhood library opened. So I should be able to work on the campanile a little. Are your libraries open? I think the peer review on the Marciana is almost done. Do you have any additional thoughts?Venicescapes (talk) 11:24, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod I did some initial work on the bells. Are you OK?Venicescapes (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

A few thoughts
Johnbod Good morning. I hope you're doing well. I had a few things I wanted to ask you about "off the record". Hence I'm on my talk page. First, I started to do some work on the bell tower. I've added a paragraph on the origin of the tower and made a graphic to help. But I need to get to the library to be able to go any further. There seems to be quite a bit of trivia on the page. It's not very 'encyclopedic'. I noticed on the guidance for FAC (not that I'm thinking about FAC for the bell tower) that trivia is frowned upon. They specifically mentioned sections labeled "In popular culture". Do you think that all of that should just be removed? It's almost all uncited anyway.

On another matter, back in September 2019, you had started to change the spelling on the Marciana from American to British but then changed back. As you know, the question of the spelling was raised again by the individual who is doing the peer review. You noted that the article began in American English. But there were never any ENGVAR points, and in reality there's virtually nothing left of that article. You and I are the top editors and have contributed roughly 96 percent. I'm wondering if your initial inclination was right, i.e. that it should be in British English. My reasoning is that the citation system I've used (MHRA) is a British system; the article is about a European library; and you and I are both in Europe. The words that stand out are centre, colour, and programme. Your thoughts?

Third item. When you type just "Antonio Maria Zan" in your search box, do you get Antonio Maria Zanneti AND Antonio Maria Zanetti (the younger) as suggestions?Venicescapes (talk) 10:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Update. The small neighborhood library opened. So I should be able to work on the campanile a little. Are your libraries open? I think the peer review on the Marciana is almost done. Do you have any additional thoughts?Venicescapes (talk) 11:24, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod I did some initial work on the bells. Are you OK?Venicescapes (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Procuratie
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Procuratie you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yakikaki -- Yakikaki (talk) 15:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Checking In
Johnbod, How are you? When last we communicated, you were puttering in the garden.Venicescapes (talk) 17:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Still am - I'll get to the FAC, but I like to let some other comments come first. You're well, I hope? Johnbod (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod, I’m glad to hear from you and to know that all is well. Here in Venice, there are some tourists … primarily Italians and Germans. English-speakers are a rarity.  Some museums are already open, albeit on limited days and with reduced hours.  Most of the remaining museums should open at the end of the month.  About a third of the hotels are still closed. A few historical hotels and restaurants have given up and closed permanently. Some of the libraries now offer limited services although, as one of the librarians said, it’s twice the work for half the result.  But at least I have access.


 * I worked quite a while on the St Mark's Campanile page and nominated it for GA. No response yet. Also the Procuratie hasn’t received any response at GA. Maybe they’re just not interesting topics for most people or I’m not presenting the information in an interesting manner. At any rate, it’s rather discouraging. I admire your motivation.


 * The only comment so far on the Marciana at FAC is somewhat negative. The reviewer applies the guideline on ‘sandwiching’ in absolute terms and wants to remove roughly half of the images and the entire ceiling from the page … even though there are many FA that have various amounts of ‘sandwiching’. Most of the images to delete would be the architectural diagrams and the floorplan which I think are essential for the average reader’s comprehension.


 * Stay well.Venicescapes (talk) 18:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw, disagreed, & will say so later. I think I warned you about the wait at GA - probably even longer in the summer. I haven't put anything up for GA/FA myself for some years. I think my time is better spent improving more articles, often in slow stages. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 18:05, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod Hello. Just a quick update to let you know that the Procuratie passed GA. Still no developments on the FA for the Marciana. Cheers.Venicescapes (talk) 13:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod What do you think of DYK? I've never given it any thought. But I could nominate the Procuratie. Is it worth it? What could I point out?Venicescapes (talk) 10:35, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * It will get you a good number of views. Take a look at how the process works - hooks should be interesting if possible - mixed housing & offices for civil sevants on a prime site? Or just taking 3 sides of the piazza? Give me a link when you nominate. Johnbod (talk) 18:13, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod I gave it a try. It's under articles created/expanded on July 28. For some reason, I can't get the link to work for you. It's at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on July 28. I failed to add an edit summary on step three (adding the nomination to the nomination page. But I don't know anyway to correct that).Venicescapes (talk) 07:14, 30 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod Hello, I have a procedural question. I nominated the Procuratie for DYK. It was on the list for submissions on 28 July. Then someone reviewed it, and now it's no longer there. Does that mean that it's promoted and is going to appear? Do I get notified of the date?Venicescapes (talk) 17:04, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's been moved to the approved page. Watchlist it & you will see it go to a "prep area" or queue for the main page. You won't get told until it appears, but can work that out from the queue page. See the DYK pages list. Johnbod (talk) 17:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * OK. Thank you. It's a never ending learning curve.Venicescapes (talk) 17:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod Hello again. I have a tactical question, actually two. I'm taking another look at the write-up to nominate the Marciana again. Is it wise to mention the people that were involved in reviewing it? Does this add weight, or does it raise a potential conflict of interest that would limit your ability to comment/support? Also, do you think that the Marciana as a subject (combined with the length of the article) can be daunting? If so, is there any way to mitigate this?

Thank you in advance for whatever guidance you can give. I hope all is well.Venicescapes (talk) 10:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please give a link if you are referring people to another page. The previous nom seemed fine, although you could have put a bit more on the importance of the architecture. I think it's fine to mention and ping the previous reviewers. I'm fine thanks, though hot - it's 38.5 here. Johnbod (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod 38.5 is definitely beyond my comfort zone. Stay well.Venicescapes (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Procuratie
—valereee (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Procuratie
The article Procuratie you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Procuratie for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yakikaki -- Yakikaki (talk) 13:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, I am sorry that I missed your comment on the Procuratie GA page, which has now been archived. It was a lot of fun to work on the article. Congratulations on the GA status!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Honan Chapel
Hi Venicescapes, I see you are doing a number of reviews. I was hoping you might keep this article in your sights, planning on taking it to FAC in the before the end of the month. As it is roughly in your area of interest, would be delighted to have feedback from you before or during the dreaded date. Ceoil (talk) 01:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ceoil I'd be happy to take a look. Thank you for asking my opinion.Venicescapes (talk) 10:19, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. I learned a lot from your instruction. Ceoil  (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ceoil You're very welcome. I have yet to take a look at several sections but wanted to wait for any further changes on your part. If you'd like me to continue now, please let me know. P.S. Did you see my additional comments on the images in the stained-glass-window section?Venicescapes (talk) 06:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Will do Venicescapes. Re keeping up; I think I am about 80% there in meeting your suggestions so far. I don't generally edit mid week, but if you have time again further comments would be gratefully received. Re images: an expansion on individual panels is planned which should help the current text to images ratio imbalance. Best as always, in these strange times. Ceoil  (talk) 07:34, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ceoil, I'll go ahead and take a look at the remaining sections over the next few days.Venicescapes (talk) 14:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sound, and there is no rush. I am thinking now that October is earliest I might push this, given various feedback has been so helpful but opened areas for expansion. Ceoil  (talk) 15:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of St Mark's Campanile
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article St Mark's Campanile you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 07:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of St Mark's Campanile
The article St Mark's Campanile you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:St Mark's Campanile for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 15:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Honan Chapel
Just to say, that was one of the most worthwhile and rewarding look overs I've had the pleasure of on wiki. You brought a huge amount to the table, and I even learned a bit about grammar and stuff (doesnt happen often to Paddy's of a certain age!). Anyways, thank you so much. Ceoil (talk) 19:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ceoil, I'm glad to have been of help.Venicescapes (talk) 10:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of St Mark's Campanile
Hello! Your submission of St Mark's Campanile at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Flood barrier
Hello again. I saw this in the news. You're probably aware of it but I immediately thought of the campanile. Having a system like this should help to preserve the tower. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No Great Shaker, thank you for checking in. Yes, the system seems to work (There was a great deal of debate over the years as to how effective it would be). They only raise the floodgates for tides above 130cm (above sea level), so the square still gets flooded.Venicescapes (talk) 11:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Must be difficult to set a threshold. We need a similar system on all British rivers, ha! No Great Shaker (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No Great Shaker, Undoubtedly, the people who get flooded before 130cm would like the gates to come up earlier. But it's expensive to raise them (the newspaper said 300,000 euro each time). Also, the tide's coming in and going out is necessary to flush out the lagoon. They think that 130cm is a happy balance.Venicescapes (talk) 12:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Bibliotecha
Hi Venicescapes - I just noticed that Biblioteca Marciana finally got promoted - very much deserved, and a fantastic effort persevering with it. That article is a fantastic example of what can be done here, I'm very pleased to see the gold star at the top of the page. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  12:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit, Thank you again for all your help in getting the article ready. It was a good learning experience for me. My best wishes.Venicescapes (talk) 12:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for St Mark's Campanile
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2472 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Gerda Arendt, thank you very much for this. A little appreciation goes a long way! I'm glad that you enjoyed the articles. Kindest regards,Venicescapes (talk) 11:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

News?
Johnbod, I read that the UK is experiencing a rise in COVID and wanted to ask if everything is okay with you. I hope you're well.Venicescapes (talk) 11:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, thanks! There are more restrictions, but they haven't really changed anything for me, except I still go out less. Nothing like Madrid.  Glad to see Italy is having very low rates at the moment - hope that continues.  Johnbod (talk) 14:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Johnbod, I'm glad that all is well. On another note, I'm hoping to submit a nomination for TFA for the Marciana. I looked at several of the recent articles that appeared on the home page, and they've all been subject to vandalism, primarily from IP addresses. To your knowledge, has there ever been a proposal/dicussion to protect the articles while there on the home page? It would seem to be a very simple solution to an evident problem. If readers have legitimate changes, they can suggest them on the talk page or make the changes when the article is no longer on the home page.Venicescapes (talk) 10:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * A complicated subject that I'm not up to date with; there have been endless discussions. There is a prejudice against protecting them, in case useful changes are missed. There are at least many eyes on the TFA, & vandalism is normally quickly reverted. The Marciana is unlikely to attract an especially high volume of vandals. You can always try asking.  Glad to hear the barrier worked! Johnbod (talk) 18:15, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * There are typically many eyes on a TFA and vandalism is quickly caught. More difficult is well meaning editors introducing stylistic preferences such as serial commas, reference templates, etc. Ceoil  (talk) 21:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod and Ceoil, thank you both for the input.Venicescapes (talk) 06:54, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod, Ceoil, I briefly corresponded with the coordinators, and they said to remind them of the concerns in the nomination. So I went ahead.Venicescapes (talk) 14:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Johnbod, Hi. I hope all is well with you.


 * I wanted to ask your advice on how to handle a problematic situation (see the St Mark's Campanile and Procuratie talk pages). There is a photographer who wants his photos to appear on the various Venice-related pages, and he continues to arbitrarily substitute or add images to the articles, most recently to the Procuratie. Generally, the photos are of inferior quality. They show the same buildings, but simply taken from different angles. So they really add nothing to the comprehension (often, he is placing them in such a way that they are totally unrelated to the text). Further, they are not properly tagged. I've written twice.Venicescapes (talk) 13:29, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * For admin help in the matter, try El C, Drmies, Bishonen or Floquenbeam (the latter having little time). - Did you explain WP:BRD to the user? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the contact information and the link. I'll wait to see what he does next.Venicescapes (talk) 16:42, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've run into him before; this is just about all he ever does, at a relatively low level. Amazingly, no one seems to have complained on his talk page, quoting WP:COI. I'd do that if he does any more. Johnbod (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Johnbod, thanks as always for the guidance. How are things in th UK? Here, we're slowly moving towards a new lockdown. The libraries have closed once again.Venicescapes (talk) 21:29, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * We've just started our second, and the weather's mostly too bad to garden. Cheers, Johnbod (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Image use
Nikkimaria, (talk) and No Great Shaker, (talk), good morning, I hope you are well in these troubled times. I would like to ask your opinion and guidance on this deletion request for an image (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2020/11/14#File:Chiesa_di_San_Rocco_in_Dolo-cropped.jpg) that I used on St Mark's Campanile (Nikkimaria has extensive knowledge on image use and No Great Shaker did the GA review).

The situation is as follows:

Towards the end of the article, there are four images of bell towers that show the influence of Saint Mark's campanile. Since they are in a series, for graphic considerations, I wanted them to be the same size. So, I cropped them and uploaded them to Wikimedia Commons, duly noting on the image description pages the sources of the original files and the fact that they had been cropped. One of the photographers has now accused me of "theft" and has requested the deletion of the cropped file. He has already removed the cropped file from the article and replaced it with the original. My understanding is that the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 international license allows for derivative works, on the condition that the source of the original image and the nature of the modification be indicated. As mentioned, this was done. I certainly do not want to use an image against the wishes of the photographer, and I plan to remove the image completely and choose another bell tower as an example. But evidently, the charge of theft is disturbing.

The user also added an image to the article which shows the weathervane. It is a good addition, but it needs to be better integrated. Also, it lacks the appropriate PD tags. Frankly, however, I am very hesitant to add tags or touch the image in any way. Can you please advise?Venicescapes (talk) 08:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Hello, Venicescapes. Hope you are well too. I understand your problem but I'm not well versed in image rights which can be a tangled web. I think the accusation of theft is over the top, quite honestly. Unless Nikkimaria can help, I would in the circumstances refer the matter to one of the sysops at WikiMedia but I'm afraid I can't recommend anyone in particular. Sorry I can't be of more help than that but I hope you are soon able to find a satisfactory solution. All the best and keep safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:35, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No Great Shaker, thanks for getting back to me. Take care.Venicescapes (talk) 10:43, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Update: I changed the image to a completely different tower, and I placed the photo of the weathervane in a multi-image template to conserve space. There remains the issue of the PD tags. Also, for a question of principle, I'd like to be able to respond to the charge of theft.Venicescapes (talk) 11:53, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The licensing does allow for derivative works to be created, and a simple crop does not come anywhere near a moral rights issue. However, I would suggest improving the attribution by providing a link to the original rather than just naming it and including an author credit directly. In most jurisdictions, simply cropping an image does not qualify the "cropper" for a new copyright. See Best practices for attribution on the CC Wiki for guidance. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:49, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, thank you for your guidance. I think that it's best to opt for a different photo altogether so as to avoid the issue and not irritate the individual further. I will, however, point out again that derivative works are allowed by the license. Kind regards.Venicescapes (talk) 15:58, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, I'm sorry to bother you again. I commented on the deletion request (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2020/11/14#File:Chiesa_di_San_Rocco_in_Dolo-cropped.jpg) that I would use a different photo. But the individual is becoming increasingly hostile. Do you know of someone who could intervene? Also, Johnbod, Ceoil, Constantine,  ~Oshwah~ , do any of you know of someone?Venicescapes (talk) 18:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe Czar and FunkMonk are admins on Commons and may be able to help. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:21, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I tried to add a diplomatic comment addressing both sides... FunkMonk (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like this is a matter of proper attribution of the crop. Yes, derivative works are permitted by the license but with proper attribution. I've modified the file's page and left a comment at the discussion, which I think should be sufficient. Please ping me again if not and I'll assist! (not watching, please )  czar  19:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, Czar and FunkMonk, thank you for the assistance. As I wrote on the deletion page, I've opted for another image on the article. So the cropped file can be deleted if this resolves the problem.Venicescapes (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

, do you see yourself using it in the future? If so, policy is on your side/I can handle the policy argument. If not, might as well delete it, since it's not that different from the original. czar 22:04, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Czar, I don't foresee using it in the future. So it's probably best to eliminate the source of the problem. I'll avoid using any of his photos. Thank you again and kind regards.Venicescapes (talk) 22:14, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

TFA protection
Hi, venicescapes. Regarding this, the brief answer, I'm afraid is no. Per the protection policy, Applying page protection as a preemptive measure is contrary to the open nature of Wikipedia. However, if on the day the article is subject to exceptional levels of disruptive editing then you—indeed, any editor—can apply for the page to be protected in the usual fashion, which any administrator at their discretion may grant (usually at the lowest level and for the shortest possible period). Hope this helps!It's a fine piece of work, and I'm happy to have commented on it at FAC. All the best! —— Serial  10:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Serial, thank you for getting back to me. I'll hope for the best.Venicescapes (talk) 12:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Some strawberries for you

 * ♠Vami, thank you for the delicious-looking strawberries. They're actually just coming into season.  I'm glad that you've enjoyed reading my work on Venice.  Thank you for letting me know.Venicescapes (talk) 08:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I hope I may add some music with thanks today for Biblioteca Marciana, about "the only institution of the Venetian government that survives and continues to function today. Founded in 1468, it is one of the earliest repositories for manuscript in Italy and holds one of the greatest collections of classical texts in the world. The historical building, designed by Jacopo Sansovino, is considered a masterpiece of the Italian Renaissance and contains works by the great painters of sixteenth-century Venice."! - The music was written for today, and I hope will be featured next year OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Gerda Arendt, the music is beautiful and much appreciated. I'm sorry to have taken the 25th of March, but it is a special anniversary for Venice ...  1600 years since the legendary foundation. Thank you for understanding.Venicescapes (talk) 08:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Nonono, no need to be sorry, - the other isn't even a FA yet. But within the year, we'll get there, I hope. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hoping to grab March 12 next year for something. A traditional day for the Cistercians. Ah, what a treat the strawberries on that day will be. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  08:47, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on this! Well done. Johnbod (talk) 21:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Johnbod, thanks for your support and guidance. Everything okay?Venicescapes (talk) 07:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Triple Crown
Damien Linnane, much appreciated. Thank you.Venicescapes (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Review
Hi Venicescapes, I wonder if you would have the time/interest to review an article about a building that's at FAC at the moment? Cullen House has had a couple of positive reviews so far, but it needs a bit more attention. Only if you're interested, of course. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  07:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit  (blether), Good morning. I'm less active at present, but I'd be happy to take a look and comment, probably over the coming weekend.Venicescapes (talk) 08:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks you, very much appreciated - just whenever you have time. Girth Summit  (blether)  08:19, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Italian Ministry of Culture disclaimer
Nikkimaria, Czar, FunkMonk. Good morning. You've all been very helpful in the past, and I am hoping you might be able to provide some guidance on the current understanding of the 'Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer'. My understanding, based on past experience, is that the disclaimer is independent of copyright issues and should be placed on images of works of art in Italy that are protected under Italian law from commercial exploitation without proper authorization. Recently, I added the disclaimer to an image on a page that I'm hoping to get to FA. But the edit was reverted. The individual wrote that as per dicussion at Commons, the disclaimer is illegal. Again, can you please provide any guidance on the current understanding. Thank you.Venicescapes (talk) 09:02, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Did the user provide any link to the discussion about it being "illegal"? The only one I'm aware of is commons:Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2012_in_Italy/MiBAC. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:10, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Not a subject I know much about, I'd probably ask around at Commons. FunkMonk (talk) 13:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * FunkMonk, thank you for getting back to me. I've made some inquiries at Commons.Venicescapes (talk) 06:22, 11 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I had an old discussion on this. Gist is that it's an informational tag used on Commons and unrelated to copyright law. I don't see what discussion at Commons says "the disclaimer is illegal". If you can link us to your current discussion, we can chime in. czar  15:10, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If it was this revert, I would ping that user on either the image or the template's talk page to discuss further, if need be. Otherwise I'd let it go since the template is only meant to be informational. czar  15:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, Czar, Thank you for getting back to me and for your guidance. I think I'll at least try to find out the reasoning of the user and then get back to you as needed. I'm not sure how a Commons discussion can decide that an Italian law is 'illegal'. Normally, I would be inclined to let it go, but my concerns are two fold. If I'm able to get the article to FAC, I want to make sure that I don't have a problem with the image review. More importantly, Venice is a small reality, and I want to keep a good working relationship with the various institutions, which generally means following their rules if possible.Venicescapes (talk) 17:16, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, Czar, Good Morning. The user responded here: commons:User_talk:Ymblanter. There was also some discussion here: Village_pump/Copyright. I admittedly am no expert on copyright law, unless it's the Venetian law of 1513. It would seem that if an agreement was made between Wikipedia and the Ministry of Culture, then that should be honored. As I understand it, the MiBAC template is simply a warning that there may be other restrictions for commercial use. If people choose to ignore it and the relevant Italian museum wishes to contest the commercial usage of the image, at least the warning was placed and Wikipedia is covered. In my experience, most museums are primarily interested in making sure that there is proper attribution.Venicescapes (talk) 06:22, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks—it looks like Village_pump/Copyright is the best place to reach a conclusion. Let's continue there. czar  18:52, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

IP address
Hello  ~Oshwah~ . I made two edits at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paolo_veneziano_Marc.jpg. I thought I was logged in, but I wasn't. Could I trouble you to please hide the IP? Thank you.Venicescapes (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Done for the two edits but unclear whether it should be hidden from the revert's edit summary too, especially if you want to refer to that edit summary per the above discussion. czar  15:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * czar, thank you very much for this. I'll be more careful. Can you also please hide the IP on the edit summary? Thank you.Venicescapes (talk) 06:24, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks like Ymblanter beat me to it :) czar  18:52, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Zecca of Venice
Template:Zecca of Venice has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St Mark's Basilica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antiquity.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Gerda Arendt, thank you for the anniversary message. I hope that all is well with you. As I recall, you'll have a nomination for TFA on 25 March. Let me know if I can be of any help. Kindest regards.Venicescapes (talk) 08:13, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Loggetta del Sansovino
Template:Loggetta del Sansovino has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Loggetta del Sansovino


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Loggetta del Sansovino, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:13, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

St Mark's Basilica
Johnbod Greetings from Venice. I hope all is well. I've started to play around with the St Mark's Basilica page and have made some initial additions and a few corrections (more need to be made). Eventually, I'd like to get the article to FA. If you have any thoughts or ideas, please let me know.Venicescapes (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That's great - I have tinkered with it a little in the past. Looking at it, I think St Mark's relics should be much lower, not the first section after the lead. I would be inclined to follow the lead with a description of the church we have now; the history section spends rather too much time (at the start anyway) on what has vanished, & the other bits may not distinguish clearly enough between what has survived & what not. Maybe start at c. 1063, with a section on "Earlier churches" lower down. It's a common misapphrension of editors that readers are looking for an exhaustive history near the top. Especially in a much-viewed article like this, most aren't.  Possibly the mosaics, or the Treasury, might go to their own article eventually.  A section on "Appreciation" or something would be good - also conservation, flood damage & so on.  Johnbod (talk) 18:29, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It's a complicated topic, and we may have to move things around a couple of times. My thought was to explain 'why' first and start off with the Aquileia/Grado conflict and then the relics. I'll start getting more together and see how it goes. How are you?Venicescapes (talk) 20:05, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Johnbod, I was looking around for ideas and came across Chigi Chapel. It's only rated 'start', which seems really low. Do you think it should be higher?Venicescapes (talk) 16:00, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Rerated "B" - I self-assess my own ones, as many ratings stay out of date for years. It could go to GA at least - big expansion in 2017/18.  Don't know if the editor is still around. How are getting on with San Marco? Pretty well. I see. Bumped that to B too. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking at Chigi Chapel. That does seem more appropriate. I agree that it should go higher. St Mark's is coming along very slowly. I really haven't even touched the exterior yet. I've skipped that to work on the interior. I do agree that a section on assessment/influence and one on preservation are needed.Venicescapes (talk) 17:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Johnbod, Hello. Hope all is well. I took your advice and started a page for the collection of the treasury: Treasury of St Mark's Basilica. It's only a start and could use a great deal of attention. If you'd like to get involved, it would be great.Venicescapes (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Johnbod, Hello. How are you? I'm basically done with St Mark's Basilica and have nominated it for GA, after which I'll try for FA. I noticed that the Basilica is considered 'High Importance' for Wikiproject Italy whereas the Doge's Palace is 'Top Importance'. That seems backwards. What do you think?Venicescapes (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

St Mark's Basilica
...continued - sorry for the delay. Yes, they should both be the same, I'd think. As always there are some odd choices in these categories. That archiving bot is set rather fierce. Let me know when you nominate for FA, or a bit before. Best, Johnbod (talk) 03:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Johnbod, I feared you were not well and am relieved. I certainly will let you know when I nominate it for FA. For now, I'm awaiting GA. I wrote to a few people who are listed as members of the Italy project, but they don't seem to be active any more. Judging from the other articles that are listed as 'Top importance' and 'High importance' by the Italy project, both the basilica and the palace should probably be 'high'.Venicescapes (talk) 08:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

No Great Shaker, Greetings. Thank you for your input on the GAR. The original reviewer has decided to not proceed due to health issues, and I'm waiting for the review page to be closed. You mentioned that you might be interested in taking a look at the article. If you have the time, I would be very happy to have you review it and, of course, very grateful.Venicescapes (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Johnbod Hello, I wanted to let you know that I nominated the article for FA and am getting clobbered. I got an oppose with recommendation for withdrawal within 27 minutes of nominating the page. That may be a record.Venicescapes (talk) 08:31, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I saw that. What I would do if I was you is withdraw at this point and run a peer review. The time between GA approval and FA nomination was perhaps also a record, especially for someone new to the FA world. Look at my 2021 talk archive: I always recommend a peer review before the first FAC. Several users did that, and all but one became FA thereafter, - While I don't agree with the oppose reasons (but admit that I haven't read the article yet) I believe that a second nom (after a peer review) that doesn't begin with the oppose from one of the delegates will have better chances. The cathedral is a historic place, - no rush ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:48, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Gerda Arendt, this is actually my second. I went through the first FA experience with the Biblioteca Marciana which did have a peer review. Let's see if anyone else comments.Venicescapes (talk) 10:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * sorry about my bad memory ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I bet mine is worse.Venicescapes (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Johnbod, thanks for weighing in. I really appreciate your support. My impression is that whereas the other coordinators limit themselves to soliciting comments, image reviews, and source reviews as needed, this coordinator is using the position to advance a very personal vision of what a FA should be, even if that vision is not supported by Wiki policies and guidelines.Venicescapes (talk) 11:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree - I was the only person to oppose her nomination to the role a while back, for this sort of reason (in a different area). Johnbod (talk) 14:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree also, and think that they rather overplayed their hand with the "quick fail" (unbecoming of a co-ord, given the implied (though I think it was unintentional) treat) and suggestion that half the page should be deleted. I see its all been doubled down, but would state your case with them and leave it at that. Stick with it; its such a significant and important topic, that I see people are taking it in with placeholders before diving into the detail. Ceoil (talk) 13:53, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the heartwarming words. I admit I was taken aback when I saw the 'oppose' 27 minutes after the nomination. I really don't think she ever took the time to read the article, let alone try to understand it. I doubt I'll get enough support to overcome her veto (although I hope).Venicescapes (talk) 14:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * At this stage, I don't think it will matter. Its a common misunderstanding that a single oppose automatically tanks a nom; its ok to disagree with a reviewer, let the objection stand, and let consensus be the judge. The mistake would be to get bogged down arguing against the oppose; not a good look and tends to put others off. ps, the page is wonderful! Ceoil (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the edits and for the words of encouragement. All is not lost. I was wondering if comments count as support, or does the reviewer actually have to state that he/she supports?Venicescapes (talk) 08:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Firstly, thanks for not giving up, and I'll review eventually. So far, my mind is on Prayer for Ukraine, and after that come the many things I postponed. Don't count supports but work on the oppose. In my second-to-last FAC, for BWV 1, the delegate waited until the one and only oppose was gone. (Not without irony: the opposer is now banned. I wonder if I should turn the refs into a state before his changes. His delay made your library possible on 25 March last year, remember?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:21, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do recall 'stealing' the day from you. Thank you for eventually taking a look. CheersVenicescapes (talk) 09:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I took this pic in 2009. It was on the German MP yesterday, with this song from 1885, in English Prayer for Ukraine. - I began reviewing San Marco, related to the Vespers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:24, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I keep reading about St. Mark's with interest, just only after the day's work is done ;) - Please, seriously: change your indenting according to the essay on top of User talk:Drmies, for accessibility, nutshell: when replying to whaever indenting, copy that whatever. If it's a bullet, copy that bullet. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC) Johnbod, thanks for your comment. You are correct that I have too much sense to chop up the article.Venicescapes (talk) 11:35, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Gerda, I thought I was doing it right, but obviously not. I'm sorry. I'll reread it again.Venicescapes (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * understand so well, because the same happened to me, for years! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Gerda Arendt, Hi Gerda, I wanted to let you know that I truly appreciate your time and corrections to the page. It's been very helpful. You probably noticed that the article received another 'oppose'; so if you'd like to let it go and save time, I understand. If I can do anything for you in the future, please let me know.Venicescapes (talk) 08:34, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I noticed but busy all weekend, - will comment eventually. Could the mosaics perhaps have their detailed article if a split is needed? (... which I don't even believe) - listen - There's a discussion on WT:DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:39, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The music is beautiful. Thank you for the link.
 * Realistically, I think that only two sections (Mosaics and Music) could be expanded further. But I would still consider the sections as they are to be summary. I mean whole books have been written about both topics. So a few paragraphs to sum it all up do not (IMO) seem excessive. I don't think any of the other sections could stand on their own and become larger articles. The relics and the treasury were already split off.
 * I think that the whole concept of Wikipedia and of FA has changed over time. I still tend to see Wiki as an encylopedia that draws upon collective knowledge (laudable goal) and FA as defined in the quality scale: "Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information." The current vision for FA seems to be that of a directory to other small articles that few people actually go to (yesterday only 9 people in the whole world visited the treasury page). With the current vision of FA, many excellent FAs would probably no longer qualify. It's a shame. In the case of St Mark's, there are already many cursory articles about the basilica on the internet. So creating yet another really doesn't make sense, at least to me. My consolation is that some readers will probably be grateful to learn more and to finally find information that is otherwise confined to very specialized texts, often in Italian.Venicescapes (talk) 09:23, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. Johnbod (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * In tone and article form, MilHist has taken over. Ceoil (talk) 01:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I would let it ride out; an oppose (or two) shouldn't be fatal, and can be countered. Ceoil (talk) 02:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Ceoil, I confess that I had thought about giving up. But that would not be fair to those users who have already taken the time to comment. I also think there are broader issues here, namely the nature of a FA and what the role of a coordinator should be. I honestly don't think that either of the coordinators actually read the article or even tried to understand it (one seems to think that it's about multiple buildings). So their opposition seems to be based on prejudice, in the sense of pre-judging. Perhaps it just doesn't fall within their interests. I hope that more people weigh in, both to help improve the article and address the broader issues. Thank you for you comments and edits. I'll keep on cutting out the excessive words.Venicescapes (talk) 08:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that - remember - while I suggested to return to peer review, I'd say now: proceed. I see only Ian Rose as a possible closer, and trust that he'll look at the merits of "opposes" for no other reason than being an unusual article. Thanks for your comment on the FAC, Ceoil, you said things I wanted to say. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of St Mark's Basilica
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article St Mark's Basilica you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:20, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of St Mark's Basilica
The article St Mark's Basilica you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:St Mark's Basilica for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 16:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

25 March: Bach
Thinking of you today, one year after the Libraries! his No. 1 today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks Gerda, and congratulations for the Main Page. Best wishes. Venicescapes (talk) 19:53, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please don't give up on St. Marks. I think its defeat would be a significant nail in FACs coffin. Ceoil (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ceoil (talk), Thank you for your continued moral support. You are correct that I have recognized the inevitable outcome of the FAC review for St Mark's Basilica, and I have decided that any further time spent would be unproductive. Two coordinators have strongly weighed in with opposition, and the article has garnered little clear support, certainly not enough to overcome the objections. To satisfy the coordinators, it would be necessary to eliminate virtually all of the notes and chop the article up into several smaller articles, leaving only a summary. This is not in the interest of the article nor of the readers. To do so would be, as Johnbod wrote, madness.
 * I share your concern for the entire FAC process. Unfortunately, Wiki's original goal of creating an encyclopedia (which was of interest to me) no longer seems to be the objective. And FA seems to be dominated by articles that would likely not be included in any actual encyclopedia. In the case of the review of St Mark's Basilica, some of the guidelines have been absolutely enshrined by the coordinators; others have been selectively applied; some have been simply invented (notes only for clarification, no citations in lead, nineteenth-century resources are unreliable), all to impose a very personal vision as to what a FA should be. Many very fine FAs, of which the project should be proud, would undoubtedly lose their bronze stars under these 'criteria', including the Biblioteca Marciana. At the risk of making this personal, I'm not surprised that the coordinators, given their bias for military history, find an article about a medieval church to be of scarce interest and too detailed.
 * The consistently invoked 'summary style' does not mean, in my opinion, that an FA is nothing more than a 'concise overview' as the first coordinator suggests. Such a definition is impossible to reconcile with the quality scale description of FA as “thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information”. Summary style requires that child articles should be worthy in their own right. This is clearly stated. In the case of St Mark's, the mosaics would certainly qualify. So when and if there is a separate article on the mosaics (materials, techniques, style, programme, restoration), it would be appropriate to summarize that on the page of the basilica. But the section, as it is currently, could not be a stand-alone article. It is not overly lengthy nor is it unbalanced with respect to the rest of the information on the basilica. The same could be said for any of the other sections.Venicescapes (talk) 11:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Also, its not just you that is struggling with her as a co-ord, and have raised here. Ceoil (talk) 00:12, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ceoil (talk), I read your comment on Gog's page and the reply from the other coordinator. I’m not surprised. Please keep me informed if you wish to pursue it further. Regardless, if you ever need anything, please reach out.Venicescapes (talk) 11:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * (watching) I believe the way forward is not to go after the opposes but to get more supports. I tried (asking 2) but realize that the sheer length of the article makes it tricky to do a full review that does justice to the article. I recieved excellent FAC reviews from Aza24, Mirokado and Amitchell25, for example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:49, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Gerda, I have reached out to several people to solicit reviews, unsuccessfully. The length of the article is, as you note, daunting. I think many are also unwilling to go up against the coordinators.Venicescapes (talk) 13:11, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm somewhat confused—the article length is now 11818 words, which seems much more manageable. Is the length still concerning for some reviewers? If so, you might consider gathering the largest version of the history section that was there, and splitting it into 'History of St. Mark's Basilica', and then trimming some of those sections further. I must applaud the thorough music section, though I do think the topic warrants at least a brief mention in the lead. Aza24 (talk) 23:13, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for further improvements! I may be in a somewhat similar situation, nominated but no support, soon to be archived. Difference: the article grew by co-nom (who inserted older citations, o heavens ...), just in recent days, and the recordings section will still be changed to "summary style". So, if you want to waste your time, give me a review, BWV 56 ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This is tricky. At present, I think I'm poison at FAC. So I suspect my support would do more harm than good. But I'd be happy to take a look. I owe you that, although I'm really not familiar with the terminology and topic. Maybe I can leave comments on your talk page?Venicescapes (talk) 13:16, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You are not poison!! - Article's talk please, or just edit the article. I'm always eager to know if people unfamiliar can understand what we say. No rush, - if it's archived and we come again in some time, no problem. First run was in 2018. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:43, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for detailed comments, I just saw a bunch of new ones when checking my watchlist. Please be patient, - 2 articles to write today (one postponed from yesterday), and I really need to consolidate the recordings. Please try to not say "you" if you mean me, - Mathsci is editing (who knows much more about the subject than I do), and has a different style, and I try not to change too much. Short reply: the music of movement is in Lilypond (a program, not an image), and I don't know it well enough to tell if one could have it smaller. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:40, 14 April 2022 (UTC)