| Revision as of 23:42, 28 December 2006 editGurch (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers109,955 edits →Re: WP admin comments: comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:05, 29 December 2006 edit undoGiano II (talk | contribs)22,233 edits ←Replaced page with ' Very well, Kelly wins. Farewell Misplaced Pages ~~~~'Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Very well, Kelly wins. Farewell Misplaced Pages ] 01:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Old messages are at | |||
| *](2004) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| == Please leave new messages at the foot of the page == | |||
| <br style="clear:both" /> | |||
| <div style="position: fixed; right:0; bottom:0; display:block; height:{{{1|150}}}px; width:{{{1|150}}}px;"><div style="position: relative; width: {{{1|150}}}px; height: {{{1|150}}}px; overflow: hidden"> | |||
| <div style="position: absolute; top: 0px; right: 0px; z-index: 2">]</div> | |||
| </div> | |||
| </div> | |||
| ==Architecture notability== | |||
| To counter spurious time consuming AfD's, I've had a stab at a draft policy for architectural notability ]. I've attempted to restrict the scope of the proposal to actual 'works of architecture', architects, building technology and legal aspects of the profession. Buildings and structures notability enmasse should probably be a separate enterprise, or at least a later one. I need to give some thought to ''threshold notability'' and have shied away from minor works by major architects, because buildings are not like music or literature, they cannot generally be ignored by the public and play some kind of role in most built environments, so I argue the impact is beyond just they're effectiveness or otherwise as a work of art. Comments (by anyone) gladly received. Cheers --] | ] 21:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == the dreaded infoboxes == | |||
| == Disruption == | |||
| Thanks Slim nice request there they have plotted this on IRC I have all the logs. It was one hell of a mistake on their part. Now it is payback time. ] 23:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh yeah almost forgot some food for thought - Kelly Martin is now editing again - as a sock - anyone besides me know who? Just a little taste of things to come ] 23:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Giano, no paybacks. Come on. Having the logs is perfectly licit, of course. Posting them would not be. I'm quite sure that Kelly is editing. Although it would be deceptive and hypocritical to claim to have left and yet not, she wasn't blocked, so there's nothing to that, except that a user whose ''behavior'' was corrosive, in my view, is still here. If the behavior has changed, then there's no big deal. It's always the actions. If you really do want to go after the misuse of IRC as a parasite on Misplaced Pages, then I think the best way is to just do so frankly, with a policy or guideline proposal. On that, I would be happy to help. However, there is no reason to go down to the personal and petty world of the small minded people who care so much about their online pride that they have to go looking for the insults that they constantly fear. Such attitudes as that are pitiable, if obnoxious. You can't cure them, and neither can I, of the sorts of insecurities that make them glom to "avatars" for the succour they lack in their real lives, and so the only thing that matters, the only thing that can be demonstrated, is actions. ] 04:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| :I think Geogre is giving good advice here. Food for thought is nice but I often prefer food for eating, can we have some more pleasant Giano cuisine? Some nice piping hot Arancini? Or some frutta di Martorana? How about a nice mint raison and blood orange pie? ] ] 21:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == You are highly valued == | |||
| You are a highly valued and respected editor, and I love you for it. But really, I hope that at least for the next 72 hours, you will agree to be calm and non-attacking while we ALL sort out the difficulties that have emerged. Good people are fighting, and that's unfortunate and sad. I unblocked you, even though I did agree that the block was fully warranted. | |||
| In April I will be visiting Taddy Belcher in South Africa. He is the head of . What is this? It is a free (free as in beer) university which serves the poorest of the poor in South Africa. People who live in shanty towns can come there and get a free education. Thousands of graduates are making a better life for themselves through Taddy's work. Can we support him? Can we, in our own small way, make a beter world? Yes. And so my point is, those who are angry with you, AND YOU, can try really hard to put aside your differences and recognize that our work really can matter to the world. Let's try to do it in an atmosphere of peace and love... all of us together. --] 00:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *Jimbo, thank you for your message, I shall be replying to you later, when have full formulated where I am going with all of this. In the meantime, I note you feel a block is fully warranted for being terse to an IRC stooge sent by a lying admin on IRC is valid. ] 08:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *Finally Jimbo time to find a few words and formulate some thoughts. The IRC logs continue to be fascinating don't they - comparing me to Everyking is fine - at least he knows where he is going unlike poor old G Maxwell and Kelly and co who are running around like headless chickens suspecting the wrong people of passing me logs (totally oblivious that any nerdy computer mad kid can be IRC's ]) they appear unable to see what is coming up behind them. They are even horrifying their own former supporters. Poor Kelly with her banal blog and aggressive questions on IRC seems unable to realise that to be a Machiavellian mastermind one needs to wear ballet shoes not wooden clogs. Yet another IRC plot has miserably failed. (It now seems James Forester does not control IRC as he once claimed to Mindspillage - odd that she never bothered to contradict him) and the "clean kill" of me plotted so openly by Betacommand and Chairboy (in front of a "highly" distinguished audience of Wikipedians) not only completely missed but is having some very wounding ricochets. I support 100% this site's commitment to education and particularly your commitment to universities which serves the poorest of the poor in South Africa - or for that matter anywhere else. | |||
| However, If you truly believe what you wrote here that my terse comments to a IRC stooge warranted a block are true, then just say the word and I'll bother you on this site no longer. Kelly Martin thinks you are deliberately encouraging my wikipedean-suicide, I loathe prolonged and dramatic deaths, if that is the case just say the word, and I'll be out of here like a rabbit out of a trap. It's your site, you call the shots - time to decide what you want. ] 22:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Hummingbird! == | |||
| Awwww, cute! | |||
| Nice choice of image. ] 01:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks, it's a rare Italian love bird, I find it soothing. ] 17:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Request== | |||
| Dear Giano, | |||
| I noticed that you have a lot of experience with getting articles to FA status. I have been working on the ] page article and am trying to get it to FA status. I was wondering if you could provide some advice on how the article can be improved? Also, any contributions to it will be even more appreciated! Thank you so much for your time! I greatly appreciate it! ] 01:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Not a threat == | |||
| Giano, if it would help to have another viewpoint, please hear mine, about Peter saying,<blockquote>''"Giano, I would suggest you didn't do that without permission. The reason is alluded to above. If you give out information given in confidence without the permission of all involved, then there could be legal implications, and I certainly wouldn't want that happening with anyone here."''</blockquote>I interpret that as not a threat '''''by Peter''''' to anyone, but rather as expressing Peter's fear of a lawsuit '''''by those quoted without their permission''''', under laws against violations of privacy. | |||
| Yes, that means the public discussion of how decisions are reached here is being made subject to the permission or forbidding, even by whim, of those involved in private discussions. Yes, that contradicts the whole concept of open governance and open records. Yes, that forsakes transparency for opacity. Yes, it's wrong to have such decision-making discussions kept secret. | |||
| But that isn't by Peter's doing or choice or decree. He's looking ahead to how '''''other people''''' might respond, not threatening to take any action himself. Please don't take that as a threat by Peter. <small>– ] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> ''02:30, 24 Dec 2006 (UTC).''</small> | |||
| I share your frustration. IRC is such bullshit. Therefore, here's a bird. Merry Xmass! ] ] 03:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Buon Natale, Giano! I look forward to a share in your projects. For a bird, don't you rather need an ]? --] 04:03, 25 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Military service== | |||
| (Ugh, what a nightmare that suggests. But fear not, this too is not a threat.) | |||
| We read that ] — | |||
| :was born in ], ] (then part of the ], now in Italy), on ] ]. He began a career in the Italian military in 1859. . . . | |||
| My knowledge of the history of the Veneto is almost non-existent, but I believe that (i) Vicenza was still Hapsburg in 1859, and more hazily that (ii) few speakers of Italian (loosely defined) would have wanted to join the Austrian military. Varsari could have hopped over the border into Italy but I don't suppose the Austrian authorities would have looked kindly on his military career there. Or perhaps I've got it wrong and Lombardy–Venetia was only nominally Austrian, its military attracting people from the Veneto as well as speakers of German, Hungarian, Romanian, etc. Any comments or guesses? -- ] 12:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == season's greetings, my friend == | |||
| Giano, thank you for standing up to the arrogant, self-satisfied clique that seems to be wielding all too much power around this place. We rely on people like you to bring sanity to WP. ] 13:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Oh Dear, have you been having visitations too? ] 14:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: WP admin comments == | |||
| '''''Giano wrote on ]''''': | |||
| :''Sadly, a very short reply, in England they have saying ''"A man is known by the company he keeps"'' I'm proud of all my wiki-friends, there is not one, I would deny. Some are very clever, some are eccentric, but they are all honourable, and I would trust every one of them. ] 20:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)'' | |||
| :''I can't post there again as the length is making my eyes go funny, I think we uinderstand each other though. ] 20:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)'' | |||
| Don't worry. I will happily discuss matters here (or anywhere else that you specify, should you so wish). | |||
| It would seem, then, that regrettably I will never be your friend, as you appear to be implying that you don't trust me. Possibly your loss, possibly mine; we will never know. On the other hand, you don't appear to be desperately seeking removal of my administrative privileges, which can only be a good thing. | |||
| '''''on ]''''': | |||
| :''This page is getting ridiculously long, I almost missed you. I would refer you to my comment somewhere down there, that a "A man is known by the company he keeps" - sad but true. The IRCadmin channel has a reputation that is now in the gutter, please do not shoot the messenger, I did not put it there. ] 20:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)'' | |||
| It was not in the gutter when I first came across it – or perhaps, lacking experience, I could not tell at the time that this was the case. And I'm pretty sure *I* did not put it there either. I would advise that if the messenger is going to be spared, so should everyone else that happened to be around at the time – ] 21:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : <s>As you seem to be temporarily blocked, I'll watchlist this page so that you can reply here if you wish – ] 23:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)</s> Never mind, someone unblocked you while my attention was elsewhere :) – ] 23:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::No unblocked now, an occupational hazzard here I'm afraid these days. I'm sure you did not put it in the gutter, but things do have a habit of finding their own level - but shooting the messenger seems to be the habit here too, allthough on this occasion it was a new inexperienced admin once again, co-incidence I'm sure. ] 23:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Er... is that "once again" intended to draw a parallel between Naconkantari's decision to block you and my decision to use the IRC channel? I'm sorry, but I fail to see the connection – ] 23:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Blocked for 24 hours == | |||
| You have been blocked for 24 hours for making personal attacks against an editor . When your block expires, please do not continue to attack other editors. Thanks ] 21:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Oh Dear, what a very foolish person you must be. I really don't think I need to say any more to prove my case, you have done it so well for me. Thank you very much indeed. Hope you are watching this page Jimbo. ] 22:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :"Personal attacks" in that diff? The sensitivity of some editors to perceived slights astounds me. I was about to unblock you, Giano, but I found that Lar had beaten me to it. -- ] 23:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Christ in a sidecar. Listen mate, I understand that you are a locus of disruption as much because of everyone else's issues with each other as anything. I understand that you're both a convenient whipping boy for some and a poster child of maligned FA editors for others. | |||
| But you '''must stop'''. | |||
| The post you were blocked for was a little bit out of line >||< and the above a teensy bit more so >| |< but the post to ANI was just, well, bad. Wrong. Almost blockworthy considering your history. You're clearly not stupid, you must ''understand'' that every time you drop a little bit of venom the response is disproportionate; you are surely ''capable'' of expressing yourself clearly and without malice yet still making your point. | |||
| So here's <u>my</u> point: Your behavior is hurting the encyclopedia. Not your alone, Bob knows, your enablers and detractors all have a lot to answer for, but right now I'm not talking about them. You, personally, are damaging the thing that you claim to be building. Hurting it by fanning the flames of drama, by giving people excuses to argue. Shave a monkey and call him dad, everyone knows they are looking for excuses. | |||
| The perceived "bad guys" are not going to get taken down a peg, the "good guys" are not going to win anything, less articles are going to get written, less attention paid to sneaky vandalism, etc etc etc. Whatever your aims are, unless they ''are'' to engender disruption for personal pleasure, the way you vent isn't going to achieve them. | |||
| I'm happy to hear how you feel about this post, and in fact give you absolute liberty to say whatever you want however you want <u>about me</u> either here or on my talk page. But the death-of-a-thousand-cuts style of rhetoric, the accumulation of small insults and scoring of tiny points with every post, it just has to stop. | |||
| Please. | |||
| <font color="black">]</font> 23:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:05, 29 December 2006
Very well, Kelly wins. Farewell Misplaced Pages Giano 01:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)