Revision as of 21:33, 26 February 2007 editGiano II (talk | contribs)22,233 edits →Hannah on FAC...?: reply to Doc← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:51, 26 February 2007 edit undoGeogre (talk | contribs)25,257 edits →Hannah on FAC...?Next edit → | ||
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
::::I'm surprised anybody cares to try for FAs, Doc, but many people seem quite eager to. Don't know why. I used to be, but not any more. It's not so much the FARC issues for me, it's that WP:FAC itself has changed. This current sandbox isn't going near FAC after the crap I got last time — I'm still pissed off about it — yes, that shows how touchy I am, and ungrateful to the nice people who supported — it's a gut reaction, I can't help it. I challenged one opposer about the sheer hostility, and he told me that's how you're supposed to talk on FAC nowadays! So-and-so does it, so it's the culture, so it's-not-my-fault-how-I-talk. Well, I don't want to put you off, Doc, FACing an article is probably a process worth going through once, if only to realize that it's not as veneration-worthy as you thought. But I've sure hit the law of diminishing returns. I don't see the temptation in "having" FAs, anyway. As the author, you get told off for "owning" if you revert anybody, and told off (on FARC, if not sooner) for failing to "maintain" if you don't. Nice cleft stick. Geogre and Giano don't FAC their stuff any more. And Paul August doesn't. Giano, I suppose you saw ? | ::::I'm surprised anybody cares to try for FAs, Doc, but many people seem quite eager to. Don't know why. I used to be, but not any more. It's not so much the FARC issues for me, it's that WP:FAC itself has changed. This current sandbox isn't going near FAC after the crap I got last time — I'm still pissed off about it — yes, that shows how touchy I am, and ungrateful to the nice people who supported — it's a gut reaction, I can't help it. I challenged one opposer about the sheer hostility, and he told me that's how you're supposed to talk on FAC nowadays! So-and-so does it, so it's the culture, so it's-not-my-fault-how-I-talk. Well, I don't want to put you off, Doc, FACing an article is probably a process worth going through once, if only to realize that it's not as veneration-worthy as you thought. But I've sure hit the law of diminishing returns. I don't see the temptation in "having" FAs, anyway. As the author, you get told off for "owning" if you revert anybody, and told off (on FARC, if not sooner) for failing to "maintain" if you don't. Nice cleft stick. Geogre and Giano don't FAC their stuff any more. And Paul August doesn't. Giano, I suppose you saw ? | ||
::::As for my current sandbox, Giano, no need to be so polite, I see right through you as usual. It's neither beautiful nor almost finished, and I'm probably the only person on this page it's remotely "fascinating" to..! My plans are to make it fit for mainspace and then move it there. It's slow because I need to research the subject a lot, I knew ''nothing'' about it. ] | ] 20:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC). | ::::As for my current sandbox, Giano, no need to be so polite, I see right through you as usual. It's neither beautiful nor almost finished, and I'm probably the only person on this page it's remotely "fascinating" to..! My plans are to make it fit for mainspace and then move it there. It's slow because I need to research the subject a lot, I knew ''nothing'' about it. ] | ] 20:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC). | ||
:::I agree with Bishonen and Giano. There is no way that I'm going near FAC anymore. Oh, I'll ''write'' them, if I feel like it, but there isn't a chance that I'm going to put up with the morons at FAC. "Object footnote citation style not what I use." "Object prose is hard for me to understand in general." "Object awful writing but I won't tell you where." "Object does not comply to British spellings/American spellings." So, here I sit, able to publish articles in peer reviewed journals, but not FAC, because, with no experience or expertise, ''they know better'' from :03 of reading one paragraph. No, thanks. I have an article now on FARC. It has been translated into multiple wiki's, and it's an FA at many of them, but only ''we'' have the enlightenment to de-list it for footnotes, because only ''we'' have a campsite set up on FAC comprised of people who feel that they can evaluate articles entymological and etymological, all with an incomplete undergraduate reading level. I don't usually do the elitest, snob thing, but, when it comes to this, I will. ] 21:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:51, 26 February 2007
Old messages are at
- User talk:Giano archive 1 (2004)
- User talk:Giano archive 2 (2005)
- User talk:Giano archive 3 (2005)
- User talk:Giano archive 4 (2006)
- User talk:Giano archive 5 (2006)
- User talk:Giano archive 6 (2007)
The wiki seems so empty without you!
Dearest Giacomo-Vittorio, where are you? We are all distraught, please please please come back to us and bless us with your sunkissed prose! Bishonen | talk 17:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC).
- Yes please! We are so looking forward to the heady delights of Monegasque architecture. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I miss your notes on my Talkpage, Giano: let's find a subject that needs doing... --Wetman 19:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Never fear Giano is here! - just a bad case of writers block - and I am consoling a loved one during a sudden and rather abrupt bereavement. A life gone - so suddenly - one more little friend will no longer stalk us on our walks to the park. Giano 19:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I miss your notes on my Talkpage, Giano: let's find a subject that needs doing... --Wetman 19:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I trust we are talking about a quadrupedal little friend? My sympathies.
How do you feel about modern architecture? I did Stephen Gardiner (architect) today, if you fancy pitching in, and spun off into Stratton Park, George Dance the Younger and his family. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Damn dogs, you love them so much and they're here for such a short time. --Joopercoopers 00:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Can we be quite clear on this (before any more messages of sympathy arrive!) the dog in question was a furry brute of indiferent breeding who followed my own highly bred hound every morning to the park. That it met its untimely end crossing Kensington High Street in pursuit of my own pet is to be regretted, particularly by my own spaniel, who I am consoling. Personally, my own early morning walk will be less stressful due to the sad demise of "Edmund" (for that was the name I saw on his collar the one time I managed to apprehend him in one of his gratuitous acts). To his owners (however negligent) I send condolences - but they should be comforted that he died in pursuit of that which he loved most. Giano 20:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"Get down, Shep!" -- pp John Noakes 21:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think the death of a dear little dog, is anything to joke about ALoan! Giano 22:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- I had my suspicions you might be a little eccentric, but the mental image of our esteemed Giano cooing words of condolence to a love sick and bereaved spaniel has moved you into the gloriously eccentric compartment of my minds eye. The Basilica Palladiana (Palazzo della Ragione) lies masterless at the fireside of improvement. --Mcginnly | Natter 13:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think the death of a dear little dog, is anything to joke about ALoan! Giano 22:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Hannah on FAC...?
Giacomo, I keep eyeing your beautiful Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery. It's been in mainspace quite a while now, and it sure looks finished to me (admittedly I wouldn't recognize a gap in a subject like that if it jumped up and bit me). Er, are you planning to put it on FAC? Or too sick of the FA circus..? Bishonen | talk 18:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC).
- How very kind of you to notice - if that is a discreet offer to nominate - please don't. The current manias sweeping FA or to be precise FARC criteria have determined me to abandon the process. You have seen my last FA so while I am still writing to meet my standards - they are mine and nobody else's standards. In order to ensure they are not FAd I keep a section back and don't do a final polish - which is a pity - but there you are. The missing section for Hannah is written and in a word processor file, but it won't see the light of day. I'm glad you like her, no one has ever written a proper biography of her, and most of the books in which she is mentioned are out of print and most certainly not on-line. So while anyone can finish the page - it is doubtful they will have information to solve the final key - My FA standards demand every known fact be there. It is spiteful of me I know, but having endured the venom of the FARC page - I never want a page of mine there again, while there about ten or so that may be there sooner or later, I see no reason to produce future fodder for the ever more demanding criteria police. I am currently here footnoting (as with Hannah) almost every verb for the simple reason when I am long gone from wikipedia there is likely to be movement to delete pages with every verbs not cited - the writing is on the all. The intellectually demanding page (i.e. written by someone who has to put some serious thought in order to increase Misplaced Pages's standing in accademia, and also to avoid charges of plagiarism) is going to be doomed as only pokemon and their ilk will meet the citing demands.
- So my attitude now is if the zealots of FARC are so clever and knowing let them write their own FAs to their own standards. In the meantime I'm quite enjoying writing the pages on obscure (and little referenced) subjects I enjoy to my own standards. Thanks for the complement though. In return I note, your beautiful and fascinating this is almost finished - what are your plans for that? Do you know the only thing I shall regret mega boast coming - never again will I have the same article on the Front page of three different language wikis in the same month - never mind at least I did it once! No doubt some very clever people will immediatly shoot my view down, but it is my view, and I write to my own standards no one else's. Giano 19:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Bizarre. I've never taken any notice of the FA process, but I had a notion that I'd like to find the time to try to take one of my articles to that standard. But if an article of the quality of that piece wouldn't pass, then I rather think I'll just continue to ignore the process.--Doc 19:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oh try it - it's like cheap wine, rough whisky and fast sex - every one should try it once Giano 21:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Bizarre. I've never taken any notice of the FA process, but I had a notion that I'd like to find the time to try to take one of my articles to that standard. But if an article of the quality of that piece wouldn't pass, then I rather think I'll just continue to ignore the process.--Doc 19:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm surprised anybody cares to try for FAs, Doc, but many people seem quite eager to. Don't know why. I used to be, but not any more. It's not so much the FARC issues for me, it's that WP:FAC itself has changed. This current sandbox isn't going near FAC after the crap I got last time — I'm still pissed off about it — yes, that shows how touchy I am, and ungrateful to the nice people who supported — it's a gut reaction, I can't help it. I challenged one opposer about the sheer hostility, and he told me that's how you're supposed to talk on FAC nowadays! So-and-so does it, so it's the culture, so it's-not-my-fault-how-I-talk. Well, I don't want to put you off, Doc, FACing an article is probably a process worth going through once, if only to realize that it's not as veneration-worthy as you thought. But I've sure hit the law of diminishing returns. I don't see the temptation in "having" FAs, anyway. As the author, you get told off for "owning" if you revert anybody, and told off (on FARC, if not sooner) for failing to "maintain" if you don't. Nice cleft stick. Geogre and Giano don't FAC their stuff any more. And Paul August doesn't. Giano, I suppose you saw what he said about it ?
- As for my current sandbox, Giano, no need to be so polite, I see right through you as usual. It's neither beautiful nor almost finished, and I'm probably the only person on this page it's remotely "fascinating" to..! My plans are to make it fit for mainspace and then move it there. It's slow because I need to research the subject a lot, I knew nothing about it. Bishonen | talk 20:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC).
- I agree with Bishonen and Giano. There is no way that I'm going near FAC anymore. Oh, I'll write them, if I feel like it, but there isn't a chance that I'm going to put up with the morons at FAC. "Object footnote citation style not what I use." "Object prose is hard for me to understand in general." "Object awful writing but I won't tell you where." "Object does not comply to British spellings/American spellings." So, here I sit, able to publish articles in peer reviewed journals, but not FAC, because, with no experience or expertise, they know better from :03 of reading one paragraph. No, thanks. I have an article now on FARC. It has been translated into multiple wiki's, and it's an FA at many of them, but only we have the enlightenment to de-list it for footnotes, because only we have a campsite set up on FAC comprised of people who feel that they can evaluate articles entymological and etymological, all with an incomplete undergraduate reading level. I don't usually do the elitest, snob thing, but, when it comes to this, I will. Geogre 21:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)