User talk:Victoriaearle/Archive 13

Hemingway; my small revert
I recently reverted an edit at this article (committed suicide). The edit was by a new editor; I did not want just a bare reversion, so I left an explanation on the editor's talk page at User talk:Kristijrn. Perhaps it wasn't a very good attempt. Could you look at that page and perhaps add to what I wrote, or repair the impression I might have left? And I appreciate your thank-you note. - Neonorange (talk) 07:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for stopping by. I've not been communicating much here recently, but I did consider stopping by and leaving a note of thanks on your page. I liked your edit summary; for some reason it made me think of True at First Light and it seemed appropriate for that page. I suppose "commit" can be seen as a crime (and since he was nominally Catholic, I think is considered a crime) but I didn't feel strongly enough about reverting myself. That said, I think the wording seemed a bit awkward. Let's see what happens there, but one thing I know is that I don't have the stomach for anymore talkpage conversations on that page. They inevitably blow up and go quickly out of control. Anyway, thanks for tending that page (and I've noted your work on other pages I have on watch) - it's good to see that someone is taking care of the 20th cent. American lit. pages. Victoria (tk) 15:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I haven't spent much time around Hemingway, in the literary sense. I have eaten at Floridta. Drunk at Bodeguita del Medio. Walked the Malecón. Listened to Fidel (loose excerpt from an hours long speech given in Santiago de Cuba: you may ask where all the lobsters have gone".) But that was long ago, and in another country. - Neonorange (talk) 06:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That's a nice post! All I can say is that I've read his books and know the area where he lived in Idaho. But as you say, long ago, and in another country. Victoria (tk) 12:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Memling
I have a sharp tounge, but with friends its always kidding. You are a friend. Comments on Riggrs page were in jest, in case you wonder. paul Ceoil (talk) 09:36, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I lost myself in a stream-of-consciousness bit of writing and was just having fun. I am worried about Riggr though, in that rest home, and now a report filed against him. Poor guy - who knew. Sounds like he enjoyed the whiskey though, so I might plan another undercover delivery ops. What does this have to do with Memling, btw? Victoria (tk) 18:20, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I had meant to urge you to nom, but got confused. I attempted to waid in with big feet with a c/e, but its really well written. Kudos. Ceoil (talk) 20:41, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks, that's nice to say. It's still being built, still needs some additions. Good to see that the Pope has gone to FAC. Victoria (tk) 23:37, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Shirley
Hi darling, I've got a lousy PDF copy of the book – many pages missing but it does contain pp. 90 and 91. Meant to email it to you only to find that you can't attach anything on wikiemail. If you still want/need it, send me a message ("bitch" will do) and I'll email you back. Cheers, --Coco Lacoste  (talk)  02:34, 26 May 2014 (UTC) in extremis.

Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible


 * Hi, good to hear from you! Thanks so much for the offer, but I got the missing two pages yesterday and have now filled in a few holes. BUT - you might want to check email anyway. Some months ago I sent a private thanks for an edit you made when I should have used that little thank-you button, but whatevs, and got worried that maybe in a moment of advanced senility I ended up at the wrong talk page and sent to god knows who - which would be seriously embarrassing! Take care. Your sig is shrinking btw!! Victoria (tk) 16:41, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Late addition: I've changed my mind, if that's allowed! If you have Shirley's book in pdf format, I'd be thrilled to have it sent on. I'll send an email (per instructions w/ "bitch"). Thanks again for the offer. Victoria (tk) 21:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, Vic. No probs. I'm not on my laptop atm but I'll send the PDF to you as soon as I get back home (Monday night, Tuesday morning tops). Sorry about the late reply – I've been stuck in this bloody country house in the middle of nowhere since Tuesday, wireless connection breaking up all the time and on someone else's mobile. Nightmare. Say hi to Ceoil for me. Cheers, --Coco Lacoste  (talk)  01:08, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * PS, I've trawled through my inbox and no epistle from a Miss Earle. May be it ended up in the spam folder.
 * Maybe I sent to the wrong person? Huh? I did have copy sent to me, so will check and pass on because, well, who doesn't like compliments? Pinging to pass on your hello. And thanks btw. I'm not in a rush. Very busy in real life. Victoria (tk) 01:15, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry
Couldn't help myself. Started reading and then before I knew it I was meddling. Copyeditors Anon for me. I'm Belle and I haven't corrected a verb agreement for 7 days. Belle (talk) 01:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No need to be sorry! Your copyedits are welcome and excellent. I didn't quite expect the page to grow as much as it has and there's still one more (fairly difficult) section to write, but then I'll be done. Feel free to meddle to your heart's content because it's still a rough draft - I've not done any copyediting myself. The Roman numerals fix was a good catch, and you'll be happy to know I found the pig. Victoria (tk) 21:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow, cool pig, Hans. I think this just got added to my list of favourite altarpieces (and that's not an easy list to get onto). It's like a porcine Where's Wally. I bet if they x-rayed it they'd find the pig has a stripy jumper. Belle (talk) 00:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've been thinking that - not about the stripy jumper! - but the where's Wally. I keep squinting and looking and trying to find after reading the sources. Some things I've still not found - where's a good high rez google art project image when you need it? Anyway, I think I'm almost finished - a bit more writing, a bit of image moving around, so if you're having a meddlesome moment or a need of copyeditors anon please feel free to have a go. Thanks for the compliment, btw. I'm about to turn my gaze toward that other medieval hospital altarpiece because I found a lot of overlap in the sources. And the concept of dying of plague in front of these altarpieces is mildly fascinating. Victoria (tk) 01:30, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Have given this a light brush over this evening; impressed; you'll have my support if you do nom, for the usual fee of course. Go you. Ceoil (talk) 21:26, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, very much better! I'd have to write FURs and I don't have access to Commons, so I think it will have to be the prettiest unreviewed altarpiece page we have. I've enjoyed writing it, though, and there are still a few bits to add. Victoria (tk) 23:23, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You dont have unified log in? Or how ever its spelt? Its a good and a bad thing; I've been blocked in 9 languages, who knew "bollocks" translates to Mandrin! Ceoil (talk) 10:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I don't! Lost SUL when I changed names. For a while I had the TK acct on Commons but for some reason it's stopped working. I'll have to figure out how to sort it out because I need to be able to edit there if I'm to write articles filled with images! Thanks so much for the copyedits, btw. Will try to get that page finished today! Victoria (tk) 12:45, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

In the section on Four Horseman you name them all and then only identify Death in the painting. That doesn't flow well. Best wishes from the High Priestess of What Flows Well (I should so get over myself). Belle (talk) 14:22, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * This image (File:Memling, polittico di san giovanni 16.jpg) in the gallery? Or the pic in the text? I threw the gallery in to see how it would look - but all of those captions need work. Thanks, though, I was apparently so taken with Death that I overlooked the black horse - which, I think, is Pestilence. Will add. I'm not crazy that the pic in the text only shows three of the four horsemen, so might rework those images. Thanks for moving that piece about the crane - I noticed it was in the wrong spot last night but decided to get it later - and thanks for the copyedits. I'll be back to it in a few days. Victoria (tk) 19:22, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The text which begins "In the mid-ground below on a sea..." introduces the Four Horsemen. The second sentence following that runs through them again but only names Death. I also shuffled the John the Baptist section around as it went from three people to five without introducing the two newcomers, but now it starts a little abruptly with John's headless body. Belle (talk) 23:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's the direct quote which doesn't flow well. I'd noticed that, but couldn't at the time think of how to phrase "Death on a pale horse, emerging from a monstrous mouth of hell" without getting too close to the source, so quoted instead. I'll add it to the bits that needs work. Unfortunately, or not (!), found yet another source with bits to add, but too tired now. Maybe tomorrow. Victoria (tk) 02:40, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Just peeking at your work on The Last Judgment
Hi! Victoriaearle. After your kind words, I've been following your talk page. I consider taste and judgment important qualities in editing Wikipedia. And I see that in your work. I hope you don't mind. I saw a small contradiction in TLD; the paragraph begins 'It retains some of its original frames. The Last Judgment comprises 15 panels; nine inner and five outer views. The caption under the closed image indicates six.' I know you were certain to have caught it, but I could not resist. - Neonorange (talk) 19:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thanks for noting and mentioning (and for the kind words!). You're right, it looks as though there are 6 outer panels (Ceoil wrote that page, but I'm fascinated and might add to it a bit). One of us will fix in the next few days. I had to take care of the issue with EH on D-day - I'd forgotten the 70th anniversary is only a few days away. Thanks, btw for the tending there. It's too much for a single person and nice to see others become involved. Victoria (tk) 02:40, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Jan van Eyck
I think a collab on the bio is in order here. We have the sources, and have most of it gathered in sub articles. The heavy lifting seems largely done, if we consolidate the material properly. So... Best. Ceoil (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd like that. Well, actually had planned to work on it, but well … I'll wander over and take a look. Thing is, after this weekend I'm off for some weeks (or more) so not sure how much I can help until later. Sources I have though! Tons of them! Victoria (tk) 00:28, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Several truck loads here. Its actually becoming a problem; they are inhibiting my room to live. Anyway, I'm pleased if we work on the Rogier if thats good with you. Ceoil (talk) 10:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * First class editing today Victoria, I'm very impressed. Ceoil (talk) 23:41, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Tks. Thought I'd finish what I started. Good news is that there's more room for images! Victoria (tk) 00:08, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Its rare I'd be opposed to more images :) Bring it on! Ceoil (talk) 00:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm seeing low quality sources slipping into van Gogh's article; I know we got burned there, but should still do a swoop to clean up. Would you be up for it? Ceoil (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, just noticed your edits there and opened an edit window. Lots of citation templates, weirdly formatted cites, some low quality, etc., so needs a quick sweep. I'd be up for it tomorrow if that works. Victoria (tk) 03:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * P.S. re the post above about the images for the Last Judgment - the new media viewer is unusable so not a lot I can do, which is really frustrating. I suppose it's nice for readers but unworkable for editors. Just wanted to mention - otherwise I'd would have made a few more crops. Anyway, yeah, a sweep through VvG is a good thing before I get swamped. Victoria (tk) 03:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Did you know you can turn the media spewer off? In Preferences->Appearance I think.
 * If either of you want to downsize your sources, I'll accept them by mail, tx. Riggr Mortis (talk) 03:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Click on the html link not the image and you can get the file name. But yes, this is a huge step backwards, and another instance of the devs thinking, "fuck the community". Ceoil (talk) 04:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, changing the settings works for en.wp but not commons. And apparently no one is able to tell me how to get a SUL login (now that's something the techs could do, automatically implement name changes across all the wikis!) so I'm screwed. On commons I still get the black screen but without the little x icon to close it, so I have to hit back and then back endlessly. And the bigger problem is not being able to see the full rez and not being able to crop. Good thing I got crops for St. Johns before that happened. Anyway, small rant. After ec - clicking the html tag isn't helpful. Today it took five minutes to find the fucking file name for the Braque Triptych. Grabbing images from commons has always been easy and it's not like we don't work a lot with images. Victoria (tk) 04:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Here is my best guess. So presumably Commons doesn't show on Special:MergeAccount. If not, go create your current name under "Create account" on Commons. I don't see evidence that this account exists on Commons already. Use the same password as here and verify the same email address. Now visit the above MergeAccount link again. I make no guarantees but I believe this will join them into one. (There may be other obvious steps like entering a password on MergeAccount the second time, or sending me your password, but that's the outline.) Adding: this is assuming you don't care about merging your old Commons contributions under TK. Riggr Mortis (talk) 05:06, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Riggr. And there you are, without admin tools, without a 'crat hat and you figured it out. No, I don't mind merging, but it doesn't make sense to me that I have to create a new acct! And I might want to comment at mediawiki. In fact, I considered making a presentation re using WP as a teaching tool at the now past NY conference but was unable to submit an application - because I'm an ip everywhere except here. What I can't understand is why a username change on en.wp wipes you out across the board. Anyway, sorry, small rant. Will give it a shot. And thanks for looking into it. Victoria (tk) 13:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * P.s - are you interested in helping with a one day sweep through Vincent van Gogh? It's degraded a lot but I think a lot can be done in a single day. Victoria (tk) 13:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

TFA nomination of Ezra Pound
Just drawing Today's featured article/requests/Ezra Pound to your attention - someone else has suggested it for 2nd July for the 100th anniversary of Blast, and I thought the three of you would like to know. Comments welcome. BencherliteTalk 16:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for the notification. I'm out for awhile because of an unexpected family emergency and can't do a thing (make a decision, write a blurb, etc), so leave it to you, and  to decide. Any thought I've been able to give to this is that if we're to commemorate an anniversary, my preference would be for the publication of Cathay (poetry collection). Thanks. Victoria (tk) 13:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Things
Saying hello and hope all is well again. Ceoil (talk) 10:36, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and hello to you. Yes, crisis is over. I meant to take down the tag yesterday but was still too tired. I see you're on a roll!. Victoria (tk) 12:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm glad and relieved. Re the FAC, its a revisit, if you get the irony. Welcome back any roads. Um, I'd like to see Ezra on main page before I dissapear. I think aniversities are pointless and lost on all but 0.0001 of people; know I was just a passanger to the research, effort and skill of you and SlimVirgin, but ye on? Ceoil (talk) 12:47, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree about the pointlessness of commemorating certain dates but really wasn't sure when I'd be back, so had to think of a solution at a time when a lot was going on. Hmm, I'll need to give this some thought, will decide by the end of the day. Just going on record here, not thrilled about seeing you disappear, though of course thrilled for you and the happy reason. I've enjoyed the work we've done together and will miss it. Btw- found some kind of mess of notes re JvE in a sandbox and opened it. Might be helpful. Victoria (tk) 13:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I prob would have given up here long ago if not for you. Ceoil (talk) 13:26, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You dragged me out of retirement about 10 times at least, so … Anyway, yeah, don't know what to say. Collabs are what make the place fun, but they're hard to come by imo. We have done some good work, so that's something. Too bad I couldn't get the Rogier finished - was on a roll there. Victoria (tk) 13:50, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * the Rogier is far from finished. I need to get JvE resolved in my head, than will be foucused again. ps, agree re collab; wiki is a waste of time if you are in single flight. Ceoil (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "the Rogier is far from finished" !!!. Then get to work, mister "I'm about to disappear"! I have more than half an investment there now and if you can finish what needs finishing I'll shepherd through FAC, even if you're gone. How's that for an offer? Then you'll be notable for getting stars without even being here and that's a feat! Victoria (tk) 15:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 *  Was far from finished when I left it. I see that is not the case now, thanks to you, as I think I said above on this talk. Forgive me, I sometimes forget what time or week it is. Is mr Hitler still banging on on an/i? Ceoil (talk) 15:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't know re An/i. Still working my way through my watch. Slowly. Done about all I care to for one day of being back. Might find the energy to haul out Dhanens and Pacht tomorrow and work a bit on JvE. Will see how things go. Still slightly in crisis mode. But the offer stands re Rogier. My July is free and clear. Victoria (tk) 16:17, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Très Riches Heures
Hi Victoria, Thanks for taking the time to add to the discussion. Your input has been very helpful, and these look like very interesting books. Best, --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:50, 15 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Glad to be of help. Victoria (tk) 20:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Hemingway again
There's a somewhat startled reply here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ernest_Hemingway - to the thought that you or anyone could have found "demeaning" a phrase in a comment of mine (actually, now that I think of it, I'm not sure whether you're referring to my use of the phrase or to another editor's repetition of it), because, as written, it was (I thought and still think) an unmistakable statement of deference and respect to the editors who have already worked on the page. I'm staggered by the thought that it could have been taken as having the opposite meaning from the one that was clearly intended. And of course the phrase didn't refer to any particular editor at all; it never occurred to me that anyone could think it did refer to anyone in particular - though, apparently, another editor certainly seems to have misinterpreted or reinterpreted it that way. If you'll look again at the comment, I think you'll see that it could hardly be intended as anything other than deference to any of the many editors who have worked on that page. - Macspaunday (talk) 02:16, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, replied there. Victoria (tk) 20:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Last Judgement (van der Weyden)
I'm very impressed with how far you brought this. PR maybe? Ceoil (talk) 15:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sort of tempted to skip straight to FAC, but then again think it's not the best time. Not sure. I did get on a roll with the altarpieces and think this is prob easier than the Memling (which I might submit someday). Anyway, up to you. I'm a bit busy for the next week, but, fingers crossed, should be fine after, if that makes a difference.  Victoria (tk) 17:03, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm constrained by time, but trust your, christ, judgement. It is FAC worty yes. Here is an old, apt tune.Ceoil (talk) 06:15, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I am too. I'll take a swing through today and assess and think about it. Victoria (tk) 13:38, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Adding: I don't have the source that mentions the panels being cut apart. That should maybe either be moved to or spun out in the "Condition" section. Victoria (tk)
 * While I would often be annoyed with 'tag bombing', if it was a drive by, in this instace I actively asked for help, and its just a way of working, similar to how we use inlines. The intentions are good with these people, please go with it. Ceoil (talk) 20:01, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am going with it. But I'd like to repair and the problem is I didn't know and the notification didn't work. So it came as an enormous surprise. Sorry. I'm really really sorry that I'm such a bitch. I just am. But if I'd known if wouldn't have taken me by surprise. I have enough confidence in myself as an editor that I can fix this, even with the time constraints but would like to do it in the sandbox where I can concentrate better. If that's ok.  Victoria (tk) 20:11, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You are a great person and far from a bitch, and I am very proud to be collberating with you again. All is good. Here can you imagine if the roles were reversed and I didnt know what was going on?!! I'd be blocked on several planets. Ceoil (talk) 20:44, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I am a bitch. Always have been, always will be. I'm not 16, I have more confidence in my abilities than people realize, I know how to read sources, and I'm impatient as hell. So. That's me. Anyway, I do understand the confusion between inner/outer and interior/exterior panels to the lay reader and the comments were on point. But I really didn't think I'd have time to do anything about it. As it happens I think I've got it. If you can have a look at my changes and maybe do some damage control for my temper (!!!), I'll wander away for a moment and take care of the three-day migraine that's winning the day and making the screen very fuzzy. Victoria (tk) 21:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You realize that deleting messages makes the notifications system fool me into thinking I'm popular and then dashes my hopes? I wouldn't worry too much about constantly explaining the difference between the positioning of the panels: anybody reading the article should expect to have to make some effort at understanding what is a complex piece. This isn't...nursery school/kindergarten/3rd grade (I don't know what age 3rd grade is but it seems popular as a token grade of derision). Migraine's more important though, I don't know how you can look at a screen at all, I find it bad enough with a normal headache. Belle (talk) 22:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I kicked the migraine out. It was the remnant after three days, but went a little crazy for a moment there. Good thing Ceoil posted to your page because I wouldn't have seen this. My notifications must be completely dead - or maybe it is the migraine and I can't spot a bright yellow stripe across the width of the screen? If you'd like I can put back the post and then you'll feel popular again! Thanks for the feedback. That's all that's important. I thought it was fairly clear but might have lost perspective having spent a little too much time in the world of 15th cent. altarpieces. Victoria (tk) 00:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It's OK, Ceoil has lit my button up [Sid James laugh] in your absence. I haven't read through the Last Judg(e)ment article but from what I've seen of the FA standard I'd think the Memling would qualify. (I always shake off a headache by swimming or riding, but that presupposes access to a pool or a horse and I think a migraine is a different beast to a common or garden headache, so....so...this is basically just pointless twaddle about my exercise regime) Belle (talk) 01:03, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Migraines are different and this hit like lighting on Friday, so I knew I'd be in trouble because those are always the worst. Couldn't even see the screen yesterday. Not a lot to do but wait until they go away. Anyway, can you take a look at this diff?. I made changes, in frenzied haste in my sandbox and then pasted back into the page, so the history might be a bit of a mess . We were thinking of taking to FAC, thought we had a page close, but I'm thinking now that it's best to let it be. I have time constraints (a house filled with family next week) and we all know Ceoil is about to leave. But anyway, now this is just pointless twaddle about myself. Victoria (tk) 01:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit of a prick myself. Ceoil (talk) 21:54, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I feel bad about this. I didn't know you asked someone to help and I had a bit of a temper tantrum, added to the meltdown on your page the other night. I don't think I should be editing at this time, and am seriously considering tagging my page again. Can we bag the idea of taking the Rogier to FAC - it's obviously lacking and I don't have the energy or time to do any more with it. Victoria (tk) 22:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear - it's all my own fault and all on me. Punch me or block me or whatever it is I deserve. I'll go around apologizing in a little bit. Need to take care of some chores first. Victoria (tk) 22:30, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Victoria, you wrote most of the page, and you felt condisended to. Thats not good from your POV, but...imo was not intended, but... if had happened to me, & if I was you...*smoke*, BLOCK. I dont think you should beat yourslf up about this, at the end of the day, there is here an article to be really proud of. Ceoil (talk) 23:09, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * HEy, now. I understand how you feel Victoria, it happened to me once that I was about to nominate to DYK an article - yes, it was nominated already - and an editor just dimped down from somewhere and tagged every little misstake - well that was not fun. But don't you dissapear on us, now. Who is going to write all those good articles? Not me, I don't have this much knowledge on art, art history and details... Hafspajen (talk) 01:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hafspajen, I'll be very honest with you. I wanted to do something nice for my friend Ceoil who has taught me everything I know about writing a good wikipedia article. But I got interrupted when a family member became seriously ill. So it's not polished or perfect. Nonetheless, I'd hoped to get to it today because we had an unrealistic thought of taking it to FAC and I didn't know that Corinne would be working there. I didn't like seeing the tagging and I've repaired as best I can for now. I have family obligations and will have to be gone for a while. But I hope that someday Ceoil and his wife will visit Beaune, for I've heard it is a wonderfully romantic spot and the painting is gorgeous, and I hope they remember with some fondness that Wikipedia can be a good place. That's my last post about this. Thanks for stopping by. When I'm back, I may work on it a bit more, but won't be for a few weeks. Victoria (tk) 02:22, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Most unfortunate. Hafspajen (talk) 02:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Whaaaatt?!
Definitely my perfume. Come back and I'll change it (If it's for non-Wikipedia-related reasons then I hope everything is OK, otherwise come back!) Belle (talk) 01:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, not your perfume! Almost completely because of non-Wikipedia-related reasons that are taking longer than expected to resolve. I will be back, just don't know when. I do check in though, and I like getting message! Victoria (tk)
 * Just leaving you a message as you like getting them. I hope everything is working out for you whatever the unforeseen circumstances are. Belle (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do like getting messages! Thanks! I hope you had tons of fun while you were away. TMI warning: the "unforeseen circumstances" are that this situation is taking longer than expected to resolve, so not working out great at the moment. Because of that, turns out I'll probably have to travel later this week (or maybe next week) and again in August, when I might be away for most of the month, but plans keep changing. Anyway, I've decided it's best to hang up my editing shoes for a while, because my concentration is shaky at best. Keep up all the good work here while I'm gone! When I come back, I expect to see DYK whipped into perfect shape! Victoria (tk) 14:34, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * P.s - I like the user name change. Victoria (tk) 14:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I will keep my fingers crossed for you (that'll look a bit weird and is going to play havoc if I start piano lessons, but it will remind me to send good thoughts your way). x Belle (talk) 14:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Good wishes
I saw your note at the Ed. noticeboard, and just wanted to stop by and express my hope that things work out well. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for stopping by. I hope things work out too! Victoria (tk) 15:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Wiki-women are bicycles?!?
To all my wiki-women friends (and guys too), this morning I started to read this and found myself outraged for some reason. I've been called a lot of things around here (and am guilty of a bit of name calling myself), but I've not ever been called a bicycle! I think this piece does a disservice to the women who edit here, but I could be wrong. And I have to admit, I was so disgusted, I didn't read beyond the first paragraph. Yes, women get discouraged. But from my personal perspective it's often simply an issue of not having enough time or patience to deal what seem to be petty issues because real life is busy. Is an article written by a woman less sturdy than an article written by a guy? Are DYK/GA/FA reviews conducted by women less sturdy than those conducted by men? Because we are tough and resilient, personally I'd say wiki-women are Jeeps or Hummers or tractors (if we have to do the vehicle metaphor), and, well, wiki-women are basically really cool. If the vehicle metaphor is necessary, then I think of women like as sleek and sexy (what kind of car would that be?). But I'm not really into the vehicle metaphor at all! Since I'm bored, bur don't now have time to write, I've decided to open this as discussion section. In case anyone is interested, and might, like me, object to being called a bicyle. Victoria (tk) 00:19, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * How unfortunate; I'm assuming the author has never heard "bike" used as a derogatory term for a certain type of woman (if you want to know what it means meet me at the "safe space"). It's a bit of a weak metaphor but I'm not disgusted by it; it's borrowed from another blogger and used as a hook on which to hang the rest of the blog post; anything that mentioned women would have done. I'm more inclined to the attitude of the Elliman's Universal Embrocation lady who has sensibly got off her machine to go round the bend and casts only a disdainful glance at the chap flailing around in the ditch. Belle (talk) 01:00, 16 July 2014 (UTC) ("sleek and sexy". Thank you. Va-va-voom. Belle (talk) 01:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC))
 * Yikes, I've not heard that term! (where's the "safe space"??). So maybe I shouldn't have started this. Disgusted is probably too strong, but the concept of fragility, easily broken, bothers me. Yes, I realized it was a "hook" from another piece - but but are the women here fragile and easily broken? I mean, look at Gerda. She's a self-confessed warrior! I like the Elliman's Universal Embrocation lady - she's left the bloke in the dust. Va-va-voom indeed! We need more of that around. Hot chicks rule! Victoria (tk) 01:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ooops, found it, courtesy of the Urban dict. That is indeed unfortunate! And I believe not at all an American term. Maybe I should shove all of this into the safe space? Victoria (tk) 01:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * (ec) Regarding the term Belle is thinking of: add "village" to the front of "bicycle", and you get the most common manifestation – pretty sure I've seen it in Canada. The idea of women as cyclists (not the actual bikes, which would be even more obviously wrong) would, at first glance, not be intended to offend... but I question the need for a comparison this dependent on physical strength, speed, and stamina – all of which have been used as the basis for discrimination against women in the past (like the Canadian firefighter who *I believe* couldn't get hired because she couldn't run as fast as her male peers). If we were to break down the metaphor, I see where the offensive qualities come from: if women are like bicyclists, does that mean they are incapable of doing the same amount of work in the same period of time as a man who is a motorist? According to the metaphor, yes (when's the last time a bike brought somebody 20km in less time than a car would have, outside of traffic jams?), but I think that idea is BS. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Crisco, yes, that's what I was getting at. I see she's getting a stipend. Don't even know how to respond to that. Without even having to write a single article! Or go through FAC! Or deal with a TFA! Why doesn't the WMF pay for a delegation of women with a track record in content building to London, if they're truly interested? Rather than paying to have a piece written using a blog comparing us to bicycles? At least I learned something tonight. Thank god for encyclopedias! 01:39, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we need to change the old saying: those who can, do. Those who can't, administer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:42, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I see she's booked her travel arrangements to Wikimania,, so those of us left behind in the trenches won't be much help as interviewees. I think I've become too cynical. But the metaphor really did bother me - and without knowing the derogatory meaning. Anyway, off again to a state of semi-retirement - because, as a woman, I have family duties that will always come before my wiki activities - which, I think, could be interesting for her study. I can't imagine I'm the only woman who cooks, cleans, does the washing, takes care of the children, works, and tries (often unsuccessfully) to write here.  Victoria (tk) 02:18, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Diary of Lady Murasaki, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Waka. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:02, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I fixed it for you (DPL bot always says it is OK to remove the message, but every time you do so a bit of his tiny metal heart breaks). Belle (talk) 11:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Belle, thanks for fixing! I'm ok w/ keeping DPL bot's msg here. Victoria (tk) 14:52, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * You can remove it without feeling guilty (or can you?) Belle (talk) 15:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Nah, now that there are comments below, I won't remove. Thanks again for the fix - I was running out of steam there and so it was inevitable that I'd make a mistake. Thank god for bots and friendly talk page stalkers. Victoria (tk) 15:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Belle (talk) 16:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Very fancy formatting! I meant friendly tps, of course! Btw - mentioned you on Gerda's page, fwiw. And also fwiw, I'll be fading in and out for the next month. Partially because I'll be traveling and haven't decided whether to go off-line completely while I'm gone, and also, b/c well, none of these wars sit well with me, so I'm off to find a good shield and armour. Victoria (tk) 15:20, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I copied the formatting not really knowing what it did (as you can see by my use of caps when it puts everything in caps anyway! Dumb Belle). Off to look at Gerda's page now to see how my name has been abused. Don't go offline completely; everybody is so business-like here; I like to have a chat; true, you going off line wouldn't stop me chatting but it would be a bit one-sided. (I like that Murasaki Diary page, pretty pictures). Belle (talk) 15:49, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the two day reply - I feel like I'm running in and out these days (well, I am, sorta). I'll try to stay online; plans are changing daily, hourly, so at the moment I haven't a clue what I'm doing when! Yes, I agree - we're all too business-like and it's not a lot of fun. Time for change! Thanks re Lady Murasaki - I'm going through a dusting off phase. It's a pretty article but needs a ton of work still! Take care. Victoria (tk) 00:47, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

"This"
Thanks for your comment at a place where I don't want to show up, as involved. You saw "this", but please mind the sequence: I thanked for an earlier comment (in the diffs provided, in Andy's section, not mine) of a user with a clear view. That doesn't make him involved. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Against my better judgement I took the risk to post there, knowing that I'm on my way out to the door and probably won't get back here for a few days. I fully expected to be called a liar - it's happened every time and always obfuscates the issue. I'd like to see peace. I'd like to see all of this stop. But what I'd like doesn't hold a lot of weight. Anyway, thanks for stopping by and setting me right. Again. Victoria (tk) 15:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Please fill out your JSTOR email
As one of the original 100 JSTOR account recipients, please fill out the very short email form you received just recently in order to renew your access. Even though you signed up before with WMF, we need you to sign up again with The Wikipedia Library for privacy reasons and because your prior access expired on July 15th. We do not have your email addresses now; we just used the Special:EmailUser feature, so if you didn't receive an email just contact me directly at jorlowitz@undefinedgmail.com. Thanks, and we're working as quickly as possible to get you your new access! Jake (Ocaasi) 19:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

FGM
I was wondering if you would ever be interested in reviewing Female genital mutilation. I'm preparing it for peer review, possibly with a view to taking it to FAC later in the year (or even next year). I did start a peer review page yesterday, but closed it when I realized how much I needed JSTOR. I'll reopen when that's restored.

In the meantime, any input would be extremely helpful, even if it's only sporadic or about one particular issue/section. There's no rush; it's a long-term project. And of course feel free to ignore. It's not exactly a relaxing read!

I've also asked Brian, Doc James and Zad for reviews, and I'm planning to ask Johnuniq. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:16, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, I would and thanks for asking. It's not a pleasant read but is an important article, so I'm happy to hear you're thinking about a FAC run for it. My availability is sporadic but let me know when you have another PR opened and I'll place it on watch. I'm hoping to be back to more regular editing in a few weeks if that works for you. Losing Jstor was a shock! An unpleasant shock. Any word on when it'll be restored? Victoria (tk) 00:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * That's brilliant, thank you. Anything at all works for me, whenever you can do it, and in whatever small dose you have time for. I'm pinging poor to ask about JSTOR. Jake, sorry, I know we keep asking whether we're there yet! SlimVirgin (talk) 00:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I managed to read a couple of section today, but then RL got in the way, so I'm thinking I'll wait until I have a chunk of time to read from top to bottom and focus - or at least try to focus. Yes, please let me know what you find out about Jstor! I'd saved citations that I hadn't downloaded and was sorry to lose them. Victoria (tk) 23:19, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, that sounds good. Anything you can manage, whenever it suits. I'll be working on it at User:SlimVirgin/FGM too. Re: JSTOR, I assume we get the saved citations back when the accounts are restored, or at least I hope so! SlimVirgin (talk) 00:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * You just caught me as I'm logging out, but I noticed your comments at CS and I'm looking at this sub-page. I'm a little speechless! But I'll have to stay speechless because my WP time is rapidly shrinking (I'm pushing boundaries, but sometimes copyediting is relaxing!). Anyway, thanks for linking to the FGM sandbox. Re Jstor, I can't even log in, so I'm worried I'll have to create a new account and that list of citations is long gone. If I'd known the accts were to be closed, I would have downloaded. Anyway, good luck with everything and I'll be in touch in a few weeks. Victoria (tk) 01:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * P.s - before I go, I've copied over the comments I made to the CS page on April 11,, to my general sandbox , so as not to lose them. I don't have time at the moment, but I believe I suggested following a general-to-specific order in the overview. Will review later. Victoria (tk) 01:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's an astonishing page, and now a new and apparently unconnected account has arrived to make some of the same edits. Thanks for copying your comments over. Odd that you can't log into JSTOR. It will let me log in, but won't let me do much, including no more saved citations. Best of luck with everything! SlimVirgin (talk) 01:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I ended up making a comment to CS because I'd suggested the reorg for that para and felt bad. I'm not convinced, though, that it'll make much of a difference because the subpage seems to indicate a full rewrite is being planned, plans which should be brought to the talk page. To some extent this reminds me of what happened on the Catholic Church article and all the work Karanacs put into it only to see now all gone. And gone too! I suppose the lesson is that writing articles about religion on WP has pitfalls - to make the understatement of the century! Anyway, good luck with everything. Victoria (tk) 16:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comment, and don't feel bad! Your suggestion massively improved that section. I think I need to bring what's happening there to talk. It's the time sink in writing all this up that is so depressing. It's such a farce, trying to create decent articles with all the rubbish going on in the background. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Maybe when I'm traveling I'll have a bit of time to dig into the talk page and into that subpage, but my sense is that you should probably say something on talk and ask for consensus to form before a rewrite occurs. It is a GA and shouldn't have a wholesale rewrite. I'll peep in when I have time. Wrestling with the Jstor issue right now. I didn't know we'll be creating new accounts. Victoria (tk) 00:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I should do that, you're right. It's the bother of having to search for diffs, the usual time sink, especially when I'd prefer to be fixing FGM, though that's another time sink for similar reasons. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:33, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't worry about doing it quickly. Look at this way - at least you're not getting ready to leave on a longish trip only to find out that maybe your Jstor acct will be available to download files (while traveling?) for some unspecified period of time. Basically I've lost that research and will have to restart when I get back. Victoria (tk) 00:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * That's a huge nuisance for you! I really hope we can just have the original accounts. Remember to make a list of the articles. You can copy-paste the titles (I assume). SlimVirgin (talk) 01:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Victoria, JSTOR is back up, and the good news is that we are going to keep the original accounts. Ocaasi requested an extension until the new deal is made, then the new arrangement will continue with the old accounts, so saved citations will be accessible. It's great to have it back. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow up, I popped in and haven't had time to go through my entire watchlist (won't have time) so this is one less thing I have to run down. Huge thanks to for arranging! Also, I've just made a longish post to CS. That situation is bothering me a bit but it's outside of the less contentious humanties areas I tend to frequent. I did find the Voorhees source and will send it to you. I suggested there that maybe the page needs more eyes: I'm thinking (and pinging here) about editors such as, , - all of whom I respect for their abilities in terms of evaluating sources. I wasn't entirely clued into the fact that a paid academic is proposing the rewrite, which is the reason I think we need more eyes. These are situations that, in my view, are undermining the project - but I have lots of opinions! Anyway, good luck. You suddenly have a lot of irons in the fire. Victoria (tk) 17:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Christus
Thanks for the copyedits, the inlines and the comment at FAC. You know the way you become blind to otherwise obvious confusions? That :) Hope all is well otherwise. The dairy is coming along nicely. Ceoil (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Re shaved vs. plucked, I decided that's symptomatic of knowing too much about 15/16th high fashions and not really important to the lay reader. But we wouldn't want anyone to think those poor women suffered from overgrown forehead stubble!
 * The Murasaki page needs work and tidying is a good diversion, but until I actually read the diary I won't get it finished. Tks, though, for nice words. Hope all is well w/ you too!  Victoria (tk) 19:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

AFTA
If you ever do get around to writing A Farewell to Arms, I'd love to help you with the project. As ghastly as that book is, it's among my favorites.  ceran  thor 04:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks so much for stopping by and offering. I'll be out for a few weeks but it is a project that's been bubbling up and I'd dearly love to get to. The biggest issue is that a enormous number of sources need to be read and books ordered from ILL, so it can only happen when I have a dedicated chunk of time. Late August might be possible unless I get sidetracked. Once I get going there, I'll be working fairly fast so it'll be noticeable and feel free to jump in. If I don't get going there this summer, pls ping me again. Victoria (tk) 17:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No rush at all... I'll be busy with classes anyway this fall, so we can get to it whenever's best for you.  ceran  thor 17:17, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back
Didn't see you sneak back in. Hope you are well. Belle (talk) 23:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it was a sneak. I'm a bit jetlagged and feeling a little ho-hum about editing again. Might have to leave again soon too, so don't want to get too involved. I see you're still whipping DYK into shape - huge respect to you. I glanced at the thread about the 7 day rule and agree with your comments. I stay out of the fray there though; put in my time a few years ago. Thanks for stopping by. Victoria (tk) 11:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

You might be interested in this. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nikki for bringing that to my attention. I unwatched a ton of pages recently, including FAC, so I wouldn't have known about it. Will take a look now. Victoria (tk) 16:01, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Beaune Altarpiece
Nice image up top, very unusual, haunting. Um, I think the Rogier is about there at this stage, I have a few bits more to add today, but am thinking about pushing. I dont want to act until you are happy, so thoughts? Ceoil (talk) 16:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I like that Christus mother and child, a bit dark, but nice. I've peeked at a few of today's edits and it looks good. I've not read through since June but will later today. I'm happy with it, thought I'd sucked dry the sources I have. One of us should do a swing through to fix the inevitable Engvar spellings I tend to introduce, but other than that, not much else I can think of. And that's a tiny issue. My schedule changes from day to day, but today it looks as though I'll be around for a while, so the timing works for me. Victoria (tk) 17:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pic - scrawny dancing baby! I've had my head stuck in a book but am about to do a quick run-through on Beaune when you're done there. Letting you know to avoid ec's. Victoria (tk) 18:19, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Phew, done for tonight. The thing we need to get across yet is the use of white, maily in the albs of in the inner panels; Mary, St Michael, the angels, the figure at the gates of heaven, and two saints in the Deesis. Then the contrast with the figures entering hell, who are covered in murky, earthy greens and browns. Lane is good here...Ceoil (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll re-read Lane. I'll re-read Jacobs too, lots of description there. I made screen prints of a few pages which I could send on if you'd like in case you can't see the pages on g-books. Victoria (tk) 23:50, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Um, which Lane? The Mass of the Dead or the Patron and the Pirate? I only have the first, will have to reset Jstor for the second.  Victoria (tk) 00:10, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * 1989. Ceoil (talk) 00:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

List of literary movements
I'm back to editing a little (paying only random attention to my watchlist, for instance), and was appalled to find where literary movement goes. Just thought I'd drop a note to the editor I know who does the most for literature articles. I left a comment, and that's all I can do at the moment or foresee doing. I feel somewhat like the prankster who drops a bag of steaming unpleasantry at the front door and runs after ringing the bell. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:22, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * First, I'm really happy to see you back! I was getting to the point of feeling like the last rat to abandon ship, (not that you're a rat) but you know what I mean. I've pared my watchlist way down too, and try to ignore it as much as possible. You'd think the devs could had a handy dandy hide button? Okay, pleasantries aside. Gee thanks, Cynwolfe! I don't think that page can be rescued. Delete and start over is my advice. But I'll have a look to see what can be done - maybe stubify and rewrite? Victoria (tk) 15:29, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

You can't go round changing your username...
...it's confusing for infrequent visitors with bad memories. That article is hard going, too many panels. I emailed you a while back but it got bounced as it went to the TK address. It wasn't important anyway. Bye, see you on my next visit in a year or so. Yomangani talk 17:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * This is a very nice surprise (and thanks for sprinkling in a least a small amount of snark style) Yes, I had a rather spectacular flounce about a year ago and discovered that with the press of a button my email address could be deleted. So I did. But, good news is that I have a new one and I'll shoot you mail from there so you can find me. I can't promise that I won't flounce from here again, but I doubt I'll zap another mail account. Yeah, lots of panels there. Victoria (tk) 17:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The "a mouse" correction for "amice" made me laugh. Belle (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * YaY, albeit briefly, WP has its funniest editor back again; welcome back Yomangani! Cassianto talk 20:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

See?
That looks great. Grrrrrreat [Belle notices large tiger behind her] Gulp. Belle (talk) 00:38, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I had to dig around to find that markup, but, yeah, I like it. If everyone else agrees, then I think we've solved it. Victoria (tk) 01:02, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

WT:Flow
Hello, I clearly upset you with my response to your comment at WT:Flow, and wanted to apologise -- I did not intend to do that, but it is hard to get the tone correct in written coversations (whether wikitext or Flow). The point I was making was that even the Flow developers prefer to use a non-Flow page such as WT:Flow rather than a Flow-enabled page such as mw:Talk:Flow. Please do not feel that I want anything other than the fullest, frankest discussion of Flow at any venue. Deltahedron (talk) 15:55, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for stopping by. Yes, I felt like I was being told in successive posts that "this isn't really the place to be discussing these issues". I tend to avoid meta discussions, but as a person who regularly uses other software for commenting about writing or to collaborate, I think what we have here is hands down the most flexible. It's not the prettiest in the world, but it really gets the job done. I suppose I could add to the long list that posts can be struck too! I see that Erik hasn't replied and so best to leave it struck and let it go. Victoria (tk) 21:08, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that -- I get given that feeling often enough myself, not least from staff, and would hate to feel that I had been guilty of the same thing! Deltahedron (talk) 21:13, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

FA congratulations spam again
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Beaune Altarpiece to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR (specific and non-specific date slots) and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. BencherliteTalk 14:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It does look very good. I actually spent a lot of time trying to get a really good comparison shot of open and closed into the Signpost (successfully, I think). Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Christus
Reading through the nativity article, and am knocked out. The iconography is amazing, especially wrt to the reliefs. I like too the flat perspective, and the Gottio like angles. Really great work from you here in explaining it all. Ceoil (talk) 09:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Tks, it's much more complicated than I expected. The idea was to be able to present Bencherlite with something non-controversial for xmas, but I'm not sure I can get it done by then. I like the angels too. Victoria (tk) 22:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
 * You have earned a lot of faith in my eye, and if anybody can get this done, then well. Onwards, I think ;) Ceoil (talk) 01:01, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course, onwards as always; and thanks for your reassurance, which is comforting. Unfortunately my work-load suddenly doubled last weekend when a colleague went out sick, so I'm facing issues in terms of time and health, but in the meantime there's a live PR and then on to FAC with fingers crossed. Victoria (tk) 20:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

GGTF

 * Thanks for the invite SV. I'll do what I can to help. Btw - yesterday a book about a really interesting woman almost fell on my head in the library; looking at it, as I meant to put it back, I had to think, wow what a fascinating person. Needless to say the book came home with me instead of going back on the shelf. It'll be my next article - when I can get to it. So at least that's something to close the gap. Victoria (tk) 00:01, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

FGM
It made it! Such a relief. I want to thank you for your help, support and guidance, and for the time you took to read the article through at peer review and FAC. I know it wasn't easy to do that. This really was a collaborative effort and Wikipedia at its most rewarding. It's so nice when that works out, and it was a great pleasure to have you involved in it. All the best, SlimVirgin (talk) 22:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm so impressed with the work you've done there and very proud for Wikipedia at this moment. Thanks for having me involved! You must be exhausted - that was truly a stupendous effort. Victoria (tk) 22:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Please stop assuming bad faith
Please stop assuming bad faith.

I truly wish for the article you helped bring to WP:FA to run at WP:TFA.

I truly found Bencherlite's comment interesting. I've only ever seen Spock use that phrase in a way to describe something enlightening or that he found someone else's statement intriguing to him. His successor science officer character Data (character) used the word intriguing in the same way, often positively.

Please, I beg of you, I have good intentions at heart here. I support the article appearing on the Main Page, and I found Bencherlite's comment to be informative and enlightening in a positive way.

Thank you,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, as I said on the nom page, if you think the proximity in dates is an issue, then it's probably best to oppose. I see that someone else has added an oppose, here, which is okay. I don't really understand what Spock has to do with it, but certainly we're all familiar with the inflection the actor uses for the word. In terms of the date, if the point system were still in place (I can't remember exactly when we did away with it, nor can I find the formula in the page history), the Nativity probably wouldn't do too well. As you mentioned, close proximity to a similar article, not broad in coverage, etc. etc. Anyway, we'll just see how this proceeds. Naively I thought it would be nice to have something in the can, as it were, for Christmas, which is historically a difficult date to schedule.


 * On another subject, while I have you here. I notice you've been curating Portal:Children's literature. Can you add the other children's lit FAs we have? I worked on Edmund Evans and The Story of Miss Moppet, so I know about those, and there's The Coral Island too. Might be more. Thanks. Victoria (tk) 18:58, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why you keep not understanding me. Let me say it clearly: I do NOT think proximity in dates is an issue. Okay? I've updated the tally, per Today's featured article/requests/Nativity (Christus) there are now six (6) unanimous Supports, the random IP edit to the wrong page with zero comment doesn't count. I'll take a look at your recommendations to Portal:Children's literature, thank you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:14, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. I've added Edmund Evans, The Story of Miss Moppet, and The Coral Island to Portal:Children's literature. This Featured Portal quality improvement drive was a joint collaboration effort between myself and User:Wadewitz, I don't know if you'd encountered her during her impressive time on Wikipedia? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:32, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I think the Portal page should be updated with more current articles that have reached FA status. I believe at least one, if not more, of the Tin-tin articles have been through FAC and promoted, Edmund Evans was the foremost printer and producer of children's books in the late Victorian period (he "discovered" three the best-known illustrators of the period) and deserves to be showcased, imo. Most of the FAs on the portal page are from a number of years ago, but more work has been done in the area since, and I think we should showcase all of those articles on the portal page if we're to really do a nice job. But, it's up to you, of course. Yes, of course I knew Adrienne - quite well, actually. I'm not a dimwit who suddenly bumbled my way into TFAR yesterday. I just choose not to display the work I've done here and I dislike having articles as TFA. Anyway, thanks for the updates you have made. I have the portal on watch, so no need to update me anymore. Thanks. Victoria (tk) 01:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've added all your above suggestions to the portal page already. They'll all be rotated through the Main portal page. Please let me know if you've got any other suggestions and I'll add those, as well. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I've updated the "Featured Content" section, which is what I meant. I don't know whether you use the bot that updates FA and GA content on WikiProject Children's literature and please revert if I've edited a section that shouldn't be edited. There might be others, too. Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Thanks. Victoria (tk) 02:05, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I've updated the "Featured Content" section at Portal:Children's literature/Featured content and prepped for the bot. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:42, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much ! I haven't a clue about mark-up for pages such as those, but I've meant to mention for a while that we should update there. It's nice to see the newer content go in, and thanks for setting up the bot. That will probably help with the maintenance and keep it all up to date. I have a fair number of children's lit pages on watch - I'll add the portal to them if not already done. Again, thanks. Victoria (tk) 03:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:09, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I've never seen that portal before, but I'm pleased to see a couple of "mine" in there. Eric   Corbett  17:24, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's a nice portal, nice to see it's being maintained for those of us who dabble in children's lit. Victoria (tk) 03:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Nativity (Christus)
Tickled pink. Can't wait. Well done. Ceoil (talk) 01:21, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It's still over a month away (and a month when I won't be around much!), but it's nice to have gotten through. Thanks for the tweaks to the blurb, btw. Looking forward to working on St. Francis - but I'll be out for a while. Thanksgiving away, work, etc. Victoria (tk) 03:59, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * re above: don't worry about silly, trivil things, and glad we are both taking a long view. Reading and out, zzzz, best. Ceoil (talk) 04:06, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, very much a long view. Which is okay with me atm. Best to you too! Victoria (tk) 04:16, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * P.s. - I'm glad you stopped by. I meant to mention over on the St Francis talk that I'll be out for a while, but didn't get around to it. I might be around a bit tomorrow but after that closing up shop for a few weeks. Very bitterly cold here, btw. Early winter again. In case you're interested in a weather report (I know, it's not FB here, but whatever). Take care, Victoria (tk) 04:31, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I am very proud for the Nativity. It was a great idea, and will get huge page views; such exposure for Christus :) :). Will we say around x-mass for refocusing on the Francis joint? Ceoil (talk) 12:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, that sounds about right. Second half of December things will ease up for me. Victoria (tk) 13:55, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * P.s - You've been busy! Really happy to see RvdW's Altar of Saint John. Lots of source overlap between that, the Nativity & Memling's St John Altarpiece, so I might jump in there too. Victoria (tk) 14:31, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Nativity (Christus)
Congratulations on getting this to featured article status. As I understand it, the plan is to get it in as today's featured article for Christmas Day, and the featured picture of it will be held back to give the article another go round sometimes next year? If it's not going in TFA this year, we could probably arrange a December 24 TFP, if you'd like, and the article could run next year. Let me know what your plans are, and we'll sort things out. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

On a related note, once I get some sources from Ceoil (we've patched up our differences once we realised we were both completely misunderstanding each other), we should get Leal Souvenir past that tiny last hump. Just hoping nothing stupid happens, like someone closing the FAC. (or, at least, closing it as no promotion - we could get this done after promotion, actually. Hmm...) Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Adam, the Christus is now at TFA. If you'd like to have it go next year, then I suppose that's the place to discuss it. I'm about to go off-line for a week, and generally can't be around much until about mid-Dec. It did occur to me, when I wrote the blurb, that the image is tiny. If we really want to deck the halls for Christmas, I don't see any reason not to run the article and the pic on Christmas day. Re the Leal, I posted at FAC because the discussion is getting a little fragmented. Unless Ceoil and KL object, I think the thing to do for now is to comment out that sentence from Campbell - which I've gone ahead and done (boldly!). I think the text still flows okay without it, but understand if it gets reverted - since I don't know Greek, haven't a clue as to how important that particular sentence and quote is. Oh one other thing, I saw your mention of writing the FGM blurb on Ceoil's page: maybe ask someone else to write it? I'm sure could, and  has been active there too, so he'd be able to. It is a difficult page to read. Anyway, that's about it. I'm around, sporadically, today, and then gone. Victoria (tk) 16:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * If we can get it on TFA this year, think that's best. Having the Featured Picture up a different year is better though, as the Picture of the Day text is based on the relevant article, so there'd be a lot of repetition if we tried to do both at once. I just wanted to find out if you had put the article forwards for Christmas day yet, so we could get things right. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok. Yes, I did it as soon as the FAC closed. I knew I wouldn't be around much between now and xmas, so needed to get it done. Victoria (tk) 16:18, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As featured picture for the 25th, I would like to suggest finding a good enough reproduction of Rogier's colombia altarpiece. I would be happy to supply the accompaning article. At least it doesnt have any Greek inscriptions. Ceoil (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * That's lovely! And I'm surprised we don't have an article for it yet. I was thinking about suggesting the Portinari Altarpiece but the image isn't any good. I much prefer the van der Weyden. I could help write the article by xmas. There's always next year too. But I do like the idea of very festive main page on xmas, so a different nativity is a good idea. Victoria (tk) 17:51, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I should probably warn that File:Illustrated_London_News_-_Christmas_Truce_1914.jpg is scheduled for the 25th this year, since it's the 100th anniversary of the Christmas truce during World War I (and, if we're lucky, that'll be replaced by an even better copy before it runs). However, we currently have nothing for Christmas Eve, and, to the best of my knowledge, nothing for Day of the Magi or Easter. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Christmas Eve sounds good to me. Adam, if you are up for this, I'll start the artice tonight, Victoria can help when she next has time, if you can find a reproduction that would pass at FP. Ceoil (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The one thing that I should warn is that if a painting isn't available at high enough quality, there's often little one can do. But I'll check for it, and, if not, will see what I can find. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:40, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok. There is also the earlier Nativity, by Robert Campin, an unfairly overlooked painter on wp. Ceoil (talk) 19:45, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Initial checks find:


 * A DIFFERENT altar by van der Weyden: https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/the-middelburg-altar/TwEY8AmU87xdRw?projectId=art-project
 * A rather excellently painted crucifixion for Easter: https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/the-crucifixion-with-the-virgin-and-saint-john-the-evangelist-mourning/7AHiWFynxOF8jw?projectId=art-project - or, if you want it with Veronica's Veil, https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/triptych-the-crucifixion/3gF9kN6BYvNuxw?projectId=art-project - though I don't think that's as good.
 * An Adoration of the Kings, https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/adoration-of-the-kings/WgG1lE8YTIpEUA?projectId=art-project

I haven't checked for Campin yet, I'll do that on the two best art sites now.

Though, honestly? While I'd still love to have that crucifixion for Easter, might I suggest http://www.nga.gov/content/ngaweb/Collection/art-object-page.6675.html / https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/the-nativity/HwGjPSlHv0db_w?projectId=art-project ? We don't really have enough on Dürer. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I'd forgotten about File:Illustrated_London_News_-_Christmas_Truce_1914.jpg - sorry about that! It's obviously a good choice given the anniversary. Of the others, given a choice I like the Columba altarpiece if we get one that's good enough for FP. I also love the movement and colors in the Campin Nativity. But I'm easy. Just leave a msg here if work needs to be done to flesh out an article before xmas. I'm more than willing to carve out some time for it. Oh, and yes, van der Weyden's Crucifixion Diptych (van der Weyden) is very nice - one of my favorites!  Victoria (tk) 21:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, sometimes what you'd like to get and can isn't the same. All the ones I linked, though, are high-resolution. We MUST do the Crucifixion Diptych for Easter, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:52, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand. I'm sure you and Ceoil will come up with something that's really nice for 24th. I'm off now, sorry. Victoria (tk) 22:25, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I have a lot of material on Dürer, books and journal articles, espically the drawings. Ceoil (talk) 22:51, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The Gerard David Adoration is interesting, but thinking it out, I am inclined more towards a Dürer. Ceoil (talk) 00:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Mary Wollstonecraft Award

 * Thanks! I don't feel that I deserve it because I did very little there, but thrilled to see the project up and running. Victoria (tk) 00:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeats
In your shoes I would either revert to the last decent version, or take it off my watchlist and let them do what they want. It's not worth you getting stressed over for one nanosecond, especially not when you have your own work to do. Let me know if I can do anything to help. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I've done both. I had to be here today because I told my students I'd pace them with their final projects by writing one of a similar length here. But I've failed miserably. Which is good, because I'm always telling them that a 7 page paper can't be written in a day! Anyway thanks for the offer and the help. I'm leaving now until the semester is finished. Victoria (tk) 23:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Best of luck with your work. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:28, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

ask
Victoria, do you know any good source that covers this topic? Or  ? at the Madonna of the Book by Botticelli, because I can't find any online references for this sentence: '' this painting, as in other large series of Botticelli's, the Madonna is portrayed as being serious, thoughtful and concentrated. A more intellectual relationship between mother and son, rather than a loving one, so unlike the works painted by Raphael Sanzio, in which often she looks at her child smiling.'' - The Madonna of the Book is now nominated for DYK, and it is loosely based on a translation  from  the Spanish Wiki. This sentence is from the Spanish article. --Hafspajen (talk) 19:12, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * It's a lovely painting! I noticed it a couple of weeks ago at Commons when I was browsing through the nativity category - I didn't know it was at DYK. I can't find that sentence in the source, and probably good that you commented it out, .  If I have time tonight, I'll try to see dig around and see what I can find about it. Victoria (tk) 22:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it was my doing - that article. I nominated that as a featured picture, and I was simply desperate, when I noticed the article - that was only two lines. So - I had to do something with it otherwise the guys at the FP will bite my head of. Now it is FP - and 6+7=13 found it and nominate    it... while I was travelling, off for two weeks - and  .. well it needs some attention from someone who is an expert.  Hafspajen (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I've copyedited a bit and checked the sources. I think it's okay for DYK now; I took Christus' Nativity through DYK at this time last year using online sources, which I subsequently swapped out. I did remove a duplicated source (Ashe) and not sure you need that blog anyway, but I can't get into the Dallas site. I've searched for you but not finding a lot in a quick search; I am finding material about this Madonna - also quite beautiful. Anyway, the entry in this google book adds a little, but not much more than what you've got. I'll leave for you to add, and can maybe swing through again tomorrow for another fast copyedit.  Good luck with it. Victoria (tk) 01:26, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Add: per this the Raphael Sanzio is a different painting, so to the original question, I'd remove the section you've commented out. It'll still be in history, and we might find it at some point. Or maybe not. Victoria (tk) 01:29, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. It is indeed an improvement, much better now. Very god job. That sentence - well it was maybe from the books cited  by the Spanish, and they are right about one thing, there is a different air in Raphael's paintings -even if I like Botticelli much better - but it didn't really added much, anyway.
 * Thanks again, this was a tremendous help. Hafspajen (talk) 01:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I won't get over there tonight for another copyedit, but if it runs around Christmas time, which it should, I'll make sure it's in good shape. For a hook I thought you might consider mentioning the lapis lazuli. Something like "Did you know that a recent restoration of Madonna of the Book revealed Botticelli used lapis lazuli for the Virgin's robe?" That's in the Australian source and easily checked, but if you do suggest it check my wording first to make sure it's not too close to the source. I've written it off the top of my head without looking at the source. Victoria (tk) 00:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the link. I hadn't looked at the DYK. Leave to you to sort out hooks. Victoria (tk) 22:29, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your excellent work. We have a hook with the lapis lazuli, Template:Did you know nominations/Madonna of the Book (Botticelli) but the reviewer wished to have something more Christmas-ish. Hafspajen (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

PS

 * By the way have you noticed this article - great potential - but not much right now-> Fantastic art.This what the French did with Art fantastique. Hafspajen (talk) 01:53, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Today's featured article/December 25, 2014
Gratz, your TFA day is coming up. I want to put one or two words in parentheses after trompe-l'oeil in "trompe-l'oeil sculpted reliefs", so the readers will at least have a clue what you're saying without clicking ... suggestions? "Illusory", maybe? - Dank (push to talk) 02:12, 4 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, and congrats btw! I'm thrilled for you and the rest of the crew. I've put in faux and removed trompe-l'oeil to avoid parenthesis, otherwise I'm worried it'll be overwhelmed with explanatory subclauses at the top of the blurb, if that makes sense. Thanks for asking - and basically I'm no good at writing blurbs so not fussed what you do with it. Victoria (tk) 02:39, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It's exciting, isn't it? Faux is even better. See, you are good at writing summaries! - Dank (push to talk) 03:20, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is exciting! Victoria (tk) 00:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article: Notification
This is to inform you that  Nativity (Christus), which you nominated at WP:FAC,  will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page  as  Today's Featured Article on 25 December 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. 23:31, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

(Sorry for duplicating the notification. I send these notes automatically. Brianboulton (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2014 (UTC))
 * Thanks for the notification. Belated congrats to you too!! Victoria (tk) 00:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Victoria, for this outstanding Christmas gift! I small one can be found on top of my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 01:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

File

 * Have you seen this? It is a rather high resolution file, but a bit dark, though. Is it dark or light, I don't know. File:Robert Campin The Nativity.jpgHafspajen (talk) 20:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello. I'm verry happy to see my picture here ! When I take pictures in museum, I always try to respect the original I see with the light that is not always perfect. In post production I never try to make the best picture (as a post card or an image for a chocolat box), that explains why the image is a bit dark. I don't want to make the visitor desappointed when he see the painting. If you want to work from the original, you can send me an email and I'll send you back a RAW picture. Have a nice day from France. --Yelkrokoyade (talk) 06:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, it's a lovely image and the resolution if very high. Sometimes I think the higher the resolution the darker the image in thumb size, but I don't see any need to change it. I was just playing around. Thanks, though, for stopping by. Victoria (tk) 18:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The detail is amazing, but it's a little too dark for my taste. I've tried cropping a piece of it so see if I could lighten in and came up with this. Problem is that the file is too large for me to download and tweak all of it, but maybe I can take one of the smaller versions. If it's okay with I'd prefer to use a lighter version for Christus' Natitvity where it's not the lead/main image but simply there to illustrate a point. Anyway, I'll play with it some more. Sorry, I pulled my comments last night btw - was very tired and wanted to think about it a bit. Victoria (tk) 17:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No, your article, your choice. Switch at will Victoria, an damm them all to hell :) Ceoil (talk) 17:07, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * We still have time - and if I play around with it I might get a good compromise. Anyway, I just managed to kick some time free so I'm about to dive into St. Francis reading before it gets away from me. Just to warn you, I tried moving the gallery up a while ago but there's a ton of white space on my computer, so that might get moved around a bit too. Would prefer to take van Eyck notes today though than deal with images. Victoria (tk) 17:16, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Understood. I'll take you forgivable crankiness and raise you todays version of my user page. You are usually right, so free pass V. Ceoil (talk) 17:27, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I just slid in here for a few moments; sort of saw your page but haven't read it. Cranky? Yes, I'm very cranky at this time of year, generally. Will be for a few more weeks. But this is when I find WP relaxing, immersing myself in pretty things away from the crowds and all the other work. Victoria (tk) 17:48, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Ps, please go ahead and snatch whatever you want re St. Francis from the sandbox - don't know when I'll be back to build on it, and would prefer to see it in the article. Also would love to collab with you on Isabella's page. Which apparently is not a van der Weyden but that attrib leans on the perfection of Portrait of a Lady, which is perfect, and Isabella is not, apparently, perfect. And you've written the JvE's re Isabella. So, your expertise will be needed. When I get back there. Victoria (tk) 17:52, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think we were at cross purposes - I meant the Christus. Please dont mind my reorgs there, still toying with it, but hugely impressed. I hope I dont mess it up, and the revert button wont bother me. Re Isabella, you know your deeply immersed in a period when you are obsessing on possible workshop copies. Welcome again to art historical nerd-dom, but delighted to see the page. I have sources, and hope you liked the Campin. I am hugely jealous of your damn visit to the Getty bty; likely shant talk to you again. Humph. Ceoil (talk) 17:59, 6 December 2014 (UTC)




 * You know you're obsessed in a period when your family can't pull you out of a gallery and you're taking umpteem pics of Isabella as though she's a friend or something. Yes, I was very surprised to find it's a copy - it's lovely in person, nonetheless - and I know you have sources. I'd like to work it up and then work up her page too. I'll send pics from the Getty, finally got a little time this morning to download and crop a few. I have one of St Francis, a diptych, in a frame, which I'd like to use, but don't think it'll work. It's an amazing place, but absolute total visual overload. And hot! 90 degrees F. But still, yeah, wonderful. The books are amazing too.  Victoria (tk) 18:09, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm lucky, the first thing we took my parents to when they came to New England was 17/8th c graveyards, and though mam was rolling her fingers, it was hard to pull dad away. Then to the BMOFA, joy. America is very impressive. We even did a duck tour of Boston. Yeah I know but...just great fun if your a tourist, so much history in such short time. It was my parents first time over, but not their last. They are working up the courage to visit NYC, which even I find intense. I lived there for 6 months in 1993, when I was 20 and green as fuck. The only place I could get served was a local Irish cop bar in Queens; fine at the time, but if I ever see those wankers again it will be too soon. But Manhatten is amazeballs, as the young people say. Ceoil (talk) 18:59, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I like all those cities. Boston is home (though I don't live there now); Manhattan is Manhattan - very intense but very wonderful. The thing that got to me about SoCal, that I'd forgotten, is the light. Made me think of van Gogh, living for years in the gloomy gray north and then finding his way south. There's something about the glare of that SoCal light that enchants in the winter. Anyway we sound like a travel service here.  Victoria (tk) 20:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Article Draft Copy EDNOS
Is at User:Nutrition.and.Health/sandbox/Eating disorder not otherwise specified. Note, these type of drafts will certainly become stale and should get deleted so we don't have stale copies lying around forever. — xaosflux  Talk 01:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I think we should delete it in about a week. Thanks for posting here; that way I won't forget and I'll stop by to ask you or someone to delete (I'm not an admin, so can't do it myself). Thanks for doing this. Victoria (tk) 01:22, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey, TK, thanks for doing that while I was out and enjoying my dinner :) FYI, that student's plea on article talk (which came, predictably, only after the article was finally locked) was his/her first ever post to any talk page (user or article), even after multiple posts directed to them on talk, and curiously, three hours later, the AN3 still hasn't been actioned.  Things are really going downhill in here, across the board.  The silver lining is that, although the Education Program has never and will never do anything except backchannel chat with profs, at least  appeared and actually did something. That's a first, in my four years of dealing with the EP. But I'll go over to the Education Noticeboard now to say all of that.  Just wanted to thank you for setting up and pointing them to sandbox.  Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:03, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm a softie, but I know how the students feel because they've been telling me each semester for five years how they feel about this place. They don't want to edit here, they certainly don't want to engage (for the most part they're scared), but they have to get their work done. I told Sage four or five years ago that it doesn't work unless the prof is fully immersed in the community but that's not the direction WikiEd has chosen to take. Ultimately I don't think it's the students' faults; I keep thinking what if that were my child, panicking the night before an assignment is due? What we do here to students is just wrong, imo. Anyway, as I said, a softie, and off my soapbox now. Thanks for stopping by - I'd only popped in to relax for a few moments with some content work when I saw all that. Belated welcome back, btw. And it's nice to be called TK again! Take care, Victoria (tk) 02:29, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think what is being done to students, to the benefit of their lazy profs, is horrid. And like you, I always think of them in terms of how I would feel if one of my own offspring were in one of those dreadful courses and put in one of these positions.  Too tough of a learning curve, with too big of consequences.  That poor copyvio editor yesterday has her goof burned into history, for all of her peers, family, friends to know about.  The profs get free TAs, while the students get a perhaps much-too-tough lesson in the real world, and while "we" in here ... just get screwed.  Probably time for me to leave again ... for about six months, I swore I would never come back here and face what students have done to med articles.  And here I am ... whatadork.  Miss you !  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I missed the copyvio incident and just peeked in over there and quickly closed the page, but I will plow through it all. Personally I don't think the profs are to blame either (for the most part) - they simply don't know what they're doing and as you say the learning curve is too big. I'll keep saying until I'm blue in the face that until profs are adequately immersed in the community and understand our norms (via editing) - and frankly that goes for the paid employees at WikiEd too - then this mess will continue. What's this about free TAs? Is WikiEd placing paid TAs in the classrooms?
 * Btw - while I have you here. I've not had a chance to comment yet, but my feeling is that an RfC for FA/TFA etc., isn't worth the cost. Fwiw. If I get a chance I'll add my thoughts before things close up there, but might not get to it. Victoria (tk) 17:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * On the first, here's what I mean by "paid TAs". I suspect that profs want the students to have a lesson, so to speak, in realworldism.  That is, seeing how people outside of academia react to their research and writing is a big teachable moment, and one that frees the prof from doing that comment and grading.  We have to detect their plagiarism, we have to correct their writing, we are giving them big academic lessons, freeing the prof from doing that.
 * On the second, ya know, I think you may be right.  I'm starting to see that, once they succeeded in chasing off and then eliminating a directorship at FAC, the current crop has proceeded to make the entire process basically irrelevant.  It's never going to be what it once was (and most of them have no idea what the standards once were), so I'm probably wasting my time!  I'm not sure most folks in here actually give a wit about FAs anymore !  But for all the earlier complaints about cabalism, cliques and a "dictator", what we have in there now is simply unprecedented.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 17:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see what you mean by the first. My sense is that they just make the assignment without understanding how things work here. This semester in one of my classes "we" worked on an article as a class project - I put "we" in quotes because the page was a mess (filled with plagiarism), which was a really good teachable moment, and the students watched me stubify and then rebuild the article. I told the students I'd try one of those last minute things they do to see to see whether a good WP article could be written in a night or two, and basically I failed miserably. That was a good teachable moment too. Problem is, I don't think the WikiEd folks are educators, and the educators aren't Wikipedians, which causes these messes.
 * On the second I don't agree that people don't give a wit about FAs. I think Bencherlite has done a really good job and I fully support Ian and Graham. The biggest problem is there are too few of us, we're spread too thin, making more for everyone to do, and not enough of us on the ground to get it all done. Inevitably stuff falls through the cracks, so in that sense it's different. But we took a hard hit in 2011/2012 and I'm not sure how many people are willing to go through all that again.  Anyway, those are my thoughts, for whatever they're worth. (I'm on break and hungry, so maybe not being very articulate). Victoria (tk) 18:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

A Gerard David
Just created Lamentation (Gerard David). Please feel free to edit and add anything you know better than these  online  sources. Since I can't find sources I don't really know who the other women are. They have an aura, like saints. Possibly the three women who arrive to the tomb with the spices and stuff? Combined with the ones with the Cross, Mary and Saint John. This is speculation, no sources. Hafspajen (talk) 04:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Hafs for starting the David Lamentation. When I get a chance I'll look it up and add to it. Sorry, been busy and will be for the next few weeks. I still need to swing through your Botticelli Madonna too before xmas. Thanks, too, for finding another Isabella in a frame - the one on the right is much better than mine so I'll swap it out in the article. I was frankly surprised to have gotten anything even remotely usable using a phone camera. Victoria (tk) 00:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Here's another David Lamentation. It's in Philadelphia. Victoria (tk) 03:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Lucy


Happy Saint Lucia's day!

"Good Morning"Victoria : Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia! 13 December is the day when Swedes perplex the rest of the world by showing up way too early in the morning dressed in white tunics, candles in their hair, singing and bringing saffron buns and breakfast in bed to nice people. Hope you have a bright day! Hafspajen (talk) 09:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

 * Thanks Crisco! Very festive pic! The snacks are welcome - they'll help get me through this time of being a Christmas elf and maybe I'll have some energy left to edit a bit. Enjoy your Christmas and New Year (in case I don't get WP messages out this year). Victoria (tk) 17:08, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * An elf? Very, very tiring indeed. I'll be taking on that role, or the role of the big elf, for Christmas 2015... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:48, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, elfing is very exhausting. I'm hoping for a day of rest (though must do something about the huge tree that's suddenly sprouted in the living room). Btw - I forgot to say that I was happy to see September Morn promoted, and also congrats re TFA. Thanks too for the help during the year, particularly at Pound. Enjoy the holidays - and the cold! Victoria (tk) 13:38, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Shiver me timbers! Or something like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Saint Francis
Excellent work. Its a good one, espically as the road to attribution is so rich in art historical thechnique. Seasons, etc. Ceoil (talk) 03:51, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It is a good one - thanks to you for getting it going and reeling me in. I'm still working on enormous amount of reading, slowly. Have been busy elfing. Seasons, etc. to you too. Victoria (tk) 13:38, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes for a happy holiday season

 * Thanks Hafspajen! Very snazzy! Victoria (tk) 15:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Something beautiful for the holidays

 * 
 * ...Modernist (talk) 00:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Nollaig

 * Very belated thanks! Yes, I hope Jan is tolerable too, as well as the rest of the year. Thanks for collaborating w/ me! Victoria (tk) 21:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Its been an honour, perhalps sometimes undeserved. Ceoil (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings
PS Congrats on a lovely article as TFA!
 * Thanks Ruhrfisch! I hope Santa left lots of presents under that sparkly tree. Nice to see you around, btw. Victoria (tk) 00:42, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Madonna of the Book
Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this Hafspajen. Victoria (tk) 00:42, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Francis
Really impressed here since I went awol, its very strong. I have a few bits to add but nothing major, more underscoring the art hist approcah, and the change of optioning in the last 30 years, and that. Anyways, I was wondering if you were interested in working on the JvE bio over the longer term, that is many, many months. Would be something that needed a PR and maybe a GA nom in the long distance. Ceoil (talk) 00:22, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh god yes! (not to get too excited or anything!). I think we've both had our eye on that and have been moving in that direction for a while. Fingers crossed, real life is about to calm down a bit after a long period of many distractions, so I'd be able to give it justice. I'm not fussed about timing. When you're finished tweaking Francis I'll add a few bits; don't want to ec you. I'm about to start checking to see whether Pacht has anything to say - if he does it prob should go in. Victoria (tk) 01:17, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, Ive been puting in serious time there, on and off, but its been an upwards, hill by hill, struggle. I would be totally honoured to forge a joint venture. Ceoil (talk) 02:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You've been cranking out all the sub articles at an impressive rate. At some point I mentioned something about adding material to them from Dhanens but never got to it, and suddenly articles started growing like mushrooms. So lots of work to do and fun work at that. Yes, a joint venture sounds like a deal - I'm honored you'd ask. Victoria (tk) 02:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Deal and deal. Ceoil (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I just hope we're clear that my comment "Many Wikipedians set the bar for what "needs to be quoted" too high, imo. " was entirely supportive of using quotes, which I think many Wikipedians don't do often enough. I'm sorry this issue upset you, & reading your comments I wasn't sure you'd taken the sense of my comment the right way round. Anyway, Happy New Year! Johnbod (talk) 03:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining, I did misunderstand! The issue upset me because I have flu and it's hard to concentrate & I simply got frustrated. But we all know that I don't do well with FAC anyway - not the ideal environment for me. Anyway, thanks very much for stopping by and explaining. And Happy New Year to you too! Victoria (tk) 13:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Worse things happen at sea. Ceoil (talk) 19:05, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Thank you for the lovely card, Victoria. All the best to you for the New Year, and thank you again for your help and support this year, particularly at FGM. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)


 * You've very welcome. All the best to you too! I enjoyed our collaboration on Ezra, was just amazed watching you build FGM and honored to be part of the review. Keep up the good work! Victoria (tk) 02:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Victoriaearle!


Happy New Year! Victoriaearle, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Hafspajen (talk) 10:04, 31 December 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.


 * Thanks Hafspajen. Very snazzy! Victoria (tk) 18:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Poor YOU
When you will get well, look at this one. Rather interesting.... Grey passion or Gray passion by Hans Holbein the Elder. Start an article ... User:Hafspajen/Grey Passion. Hafspajen (talk) 15:23, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It is interesting, thanks. Won't get to it for a while though, but will keep it in mind. Victoria (tk) 20:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Get well soon
As it says on the tin. And a relatively happy new year. 01:53, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm trying! Happy New Year to you and Mrs. Ceoil. A very happy one! Victoria (tk) 20:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC)