| Revision as of 13:54, 13 December 2008 editGiano II (talk | contribs)22,233 edits →Blocked: Sod the page go finish it yourself← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:59, 26 June 2023 edit undoFastily (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled100,543 edits cleaned up bot spamTag: Replaced | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| <div style="float:right;margin-right:0.9em"> | |||
| ] | |||
| </div> | |||
| Old messages are at: | |||
| *] (2004) | |||
| *] (2005) | |||
| *] (2005) | |||
| *] (2006) | |||
| *] (2006) | |||
| *] (2007) | |||
| *] (2007) | |||
| *] (2008) | |||
| *] (2008) | |||
| '''Essays:''' | |||
| * | |||
| *] (unfinished) | |||
| == Interesting diffs == | |||
| "''I'm reminded of the characters in Solzhenitsyn's novels.''" | |||
| == Please do leave new messages below == | |||
| ==Vanbrugh== | |||
| FYI I'm currently ripping through the "importance" status of articles on the architecture project. I notice that every US architect who has ever breathed has "Top importance" while this gent was slumming it along with John Verge (never mind him!) So I have raised his game. If you look down my contrbutions list, you may find some changes that you want to buy into. I saw in passing one or two articles, eg Banqueting Hall, that could use your ministrations rather badly. I raised that one to "top" as well, but it needs ''you'' to justify it. ] (]) 15:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::I don't undertsand, surely any building by ] does not need me to "justify" it. Does it? ] (]) 16:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Are you ''trying'' to be difficult or what? It's the '''article''' that requires your ministrations, not the blinking building! I can't think of any body who would be better at improving it! ] (]) 10:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I want to start an unassessment drive, where I reward people with vaporous prizes for being the first to strip the "assessment" from 1,000 articles. An assessment is worth exactly the amount of thought that went into it. Ergo, any done by a "drive" needs to be removed. ] (]) 18:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::I could introduce the ] a brick per every 100 re-assessments. I seem to remember the poor old ] is of only "mid-importance" - no matter - what is the greatest palace and treasure house in the city that was the cradle of civilization (as we know it)? ] (]) 19:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Fortunately the Wikiproject importance assessments have no real effect on anything, so they can be safely ignored and left to those who care about that kind of thing. --] (]) 01:03, 11 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :That's just it. If they don't actually ''do'' anything, and if no one ''thought'' before making them, and if the sole reason for them is the self-gratification of the person "finishing first," then how, exactly, is the assessment drive unlike a vast circle jerk? I say that, rather than orgy, because orgies require partners, where the assessments have no standards and are done is pure, delighted isolation. An unassessment drive would therefore be rightly called the Misplaced Pages Dry Cleaning Drive: getting the stains out. ] (]) 12:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::It's possible that the assessments have some use, I just haven't found any. It's the same with stub sorting. I assume the people who do it have some reason, and if not then it's their problem. --] (]) 13:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Well, I have: without "Assessment Drives" they'd be . Keep them busy, I say.--] (]) 14:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thanks all! I think I'll go and scribble on some walls! | |||
| ::::If we are going to assess articles, then it needs to be on some comparative sort of basis. If a style, a building or an architect appears in most architectural histories, then it is important. If it don't, then it ain't. It's just possible that by rating an article at '''top''' priority that it might attract the attention, and ministrations of an editor who writes FA articles. If we are really building a worthwhile architectural project here on wiki, then St Paul's Cathedral, for example, ought at least to have an intro that states the building's significance, and it doesn't. | |||
| ::::I find lists that give things a priority rather useful. | |||
| ::::] (]) 10:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :'''''Aha!''''' And here we come to the crux of the matter. Does the assassment bring editors? (Unproven, at this point.) Does it bring editors more effectively than a '''category''' (which isn't plastered across the top of the talk page)? (Unlikely, at this point.) Does it bring the mythical FA writer? (Unproven, unlikely.) Does it bring expert editors? (Very unlikely.) Would it bring editors more effectively than a list on a project page? (''Extremely'' unlikely.) Because the assassments are going to draw only those involved in assassing, those who consider it relevant, it could ''only'' succeed in these aims if it had skilled, expert editors among its adherents, and, without being dogmatic, it does not appear that ''many'' such editors are involved, because most skillful editors 1) look for their favorite articles to work on, 2) look for articles they have recently done research on, 3) stumble on articles and ''immediately begin editing, rather than marking with an assessment grade.'' | |||
| :So, it seems, we're back to purposeless, or at least less effective than less obtrusive and subjective measures. ] (]) 12:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :: Why don't we take this at the Village Pump instead sitting around grumping in Giano's front yard? --] (]) 15:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Because this is the place I come to enjoy grumping......--] (]) 15:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::because it's a very grumpy page. ] (]) 16:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh, and another thing.... While no one needs to cast aspersions or asparagus at the people, whoever they are, who ''do'' respond to assessment marks, the thing is that ''any anonymous, rapid, mass purpose, open call for immediate and vast assessment of every article as quickly as possible'' is going to be inherently counter to the stated purpose. If an experienced, expert editor were going to respond to all those with a "high priority" mark, then that editor would do so ''only so long as the assessments were correct.'' Hit ten or twelve "high priority" marks that were put by someone totally ignorant or by someone who misunderstood, and that editor will quit using the assessments. More tellingly, a full article explaining everything there is to know about an obscure subject (the ], for example) that gets marked as "stub" is going to get deleted or ignored by the hypothetical Classics expert who might have something legitimate to add. Instead, that Classicist is going to be directed to ] or ], where little help is needed and much mush is lumped. The very speed and inexpertise of a "drive" for assessment '''guarantees failure''' of the assessments. ] (]) 16:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Images in ] == | |||
| Hi Giano. I was wiki-stalking you a bit and came across ]. Many of the pictures look like they have lost their colour depth in some conversion step. Do you still have the original .jpg files from the camera? Otherwise, I am considering getting some pictures from that all have a good license. --] (]) 18:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes, I have noticed you. The pictures I took '''expressley''' for this article to illustrate certain architectural points have been completely fucked up by some idiotic developer somewhere switching off some gadget. There was a huge thread here somewhere - check the archives. No I do not have the originals, I stupidly thought uploading them to Misplaced Pages would make them safe. ] (]) 20:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::That's annoying. ] was lost in the , but I can't find any explanation for the others, such as ]. Btw, I had no idea the Image: space was just renamed to File: --] (]) 21:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::I have no idea, what has gone on, but it's not good enough is it? I'm afraid people fiddle with thigs on Misplaced Pages which they don't understand, take them to commons which they understand even less, and the result is chaos. ] (]) 22:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::I was able to recover the original ] from en-wiki's deleted files. If you list out the other images on that page that look ''funny'', I'll see what I can dig up. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 22:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you MBisanz, for a start some twit has moved and renamed the name plan (] so that it can no longer be read properly on the page, if you scroll down you see many of the images are the same. APocs new image of the portico is good, and far better than nothing, but fails to illustrate that the "temple" is in fact a portico of the house, which I the image I photographed and uploaded (expressly for that purpose did) did. I wonder what the outcry would be if hald the images of porn stars were so downgraded. ] (]) 22:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hmm, that one didn't look de-graded, but I re-uploaded the original copy you had uploaded. I'll try to get to the others on that page later tonight. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 22:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| ::Right, with the from-below angle it looks like a stand-alone temple. I found the technical problem: MediaWiki can not rescale GIF images. It probable could when Giano uploaded the images. Instead it sends the full size image and lets the browser do the scaling. This will have different effects with different browsers, and it often looks bad. I converted them to PNG, and it seems to display fine now. For future photos, upload them in .jpg format. For drawings, .png is good. By the way, I found this drawing of the house. --] (]) 23:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Yes, I think we have had all of this before, it has something to do with someone switching something off, which apparently at a later date was going to be switched back on and then solve the problem, except it never was switched back on. Thanks for your help, I think it is important that people can sere that the temple is assymetrical. one has to show the design faults as well as the highlights to be balanced. ] (]) 10:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Blocked == | |||
| What idiot has blocked me! I'm in the middle of editing and just lost a huge chunk of work! ] (]) 12:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Somebody get hold of that stupid Elonka! . ] (]) 12:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Your block log doesn't show a block. ]] 12:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::well trust me, I am well and truly blocked and it says it is Elonk who has done it - I am as a mad as hell. Stupid woman has probably blocked half of London SW ] (]) 12:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::She has even been warned about it on her page threee houra ago yet sghe is still doing it - an hours - loads of work down th drain. ] (]) 12:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| She isn't still doing something. She hasn't been around for the last three hours. What is the block message. ] | ] 12:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::What is the block message? And don't call people stupid, it's rude. ] | ] 12:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ;;;I have just lost loads of bloody research because she is still doing something she was warned not to do three times over four hours ago. She has managed to block London! . ] (]) 12:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| There is not entry in your block log Giano. Can you please post an unblock message using the template provided when you try to edit the page. ]] 12:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh and what does the edit link for WJBscribe's user page have to do with anything? ]] 12:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::God know? It left to a block warning a moment ago. ] (]) 12:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Giano, I have altered your account to be able to edit though IP blocks - can you try again? ]] 12:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thank you now I can edit - Elonka ais I was ashly who was edit warring? What the hell is she playing at? ] (]) 12:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Next thing to do is to remove the block on the account you mentioned and reblock. ]] 12:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I'm not sure what went wrong there, the block you got hit by didnt have autoblock enabled so you shouldnt have been got (I think - I'm rusty). Either way i have redone the block - any admin feel free to change it if it continues to cause problems. ]] 12:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Ok I get it - Elonka had left autoblock enabled which doesn't show up in the log. Shouldnt be any problem now. ]] 12:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::OK the autoblock is removed so it wont cause anyone else any problems. If noone objects I would suggest leaving IPblock exempt enabled for Giano - not like he is going to (disruptively) sock is it. ]] 12:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Does no-one train these incompetents before hand them their tools? It's like giving paint guns to children. ] (]) 12:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I've told you once now I'm warning you. Stop it! Or I'll block you for personal attacks. ] | ] 12:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Please don't. Elonka is a big girl. ]] 12:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Go and tell Elonka to learn how to be an Admin! ] (]) 12:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::OK you win. Blocked for 24 hours. ] | ] 12:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I give up trying to write a page today. You lot are supposed to be here to assist the writing of an encyclopedia. It seems to me you are nothing more than a handicap to that goal. ] (]) 12:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| * Theresa, you should not block somebody for venting on their own talk page. Giano is not hurting anybody here. Your block of him is doing more harm than good. Please undo it immediately. You're not authorized by ArbCom to place this block and you should not have done so. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:06, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Theresa, I have to ask: | |||
| #What the hell were you doing here to ''take umbrage on behalf of someone else?'' | |||
| #Why are you deciding that ''someone else'' has been insulted? | |||
| #What kind of understanding of the world, humanity, society, language, or being alive are you demonstrating when you decide that a wise standard is to block the aggrieved party for reacting? | |||
| #Have you even considered the fact that Elonka was doing vast IP blocks, ill advised one, and destroying work, was ''warned to stop,'' continued anyway, ''did not reverse'' the actions, ''damaged article writing'' in progress, and '''you are blocking the person who brought this to attention?''' Had Giano not been upset, legitimately, this would have continued, and so the very thing that got the action -- being upset -- is what you think deserves punishment? | |||
| #Is there a conversation going on that you have not shared? Are you deciding simply on ''personal standards'' that Giano's language is so vicious that he can't edit? If so, isn't it fair game for any single administrator to similarly decide that it ''isn't'' insulting (since neither you nor that admin are actually the victim of the supposed insults)? | |||
| #Do you routinely watch this page? If so, have you any thoughts on the matters discussed above? Why is your first entry into a ''discussion'' an '''instruction''' to someone on how to speak? | |||
| #Does no one care anymore about block warnings being something greater than ten minutes? I seem to recall their being 24 hours, precisely to avoid passionate, involved admins blocking out of anger. | |||
| #Does no one ''still'' care that blocked users need to have their blocks explained to them? "That does it" is not really an explanation. | |||
| Your behavior here is uncharacteristic and foolish. It most assuredly should not stand. It reflects only the worst, most personal and personalized and personality-driven practices. Cut it out. (Should I say "cut it out or else" to be like everyone else these days?) ] (]) 13:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Let me ask a pointed question. For transparency, Theresa, who contacted you to ask for this block? I haven't seen you posting here before. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::This is being discussed on my talk page too btw.,. It doesn't look to me that she was contacted by anyone - the comments were very quickly followed by the block. ]] 13:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Oh ny good God! Nobody asked me to block him. Viridea I see what you mean now by ]. ] | ] 13:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh? Theresa, I did not suspect you would drop back to the foolhardy dismissal of legitimate questions with the gay slang pejorative. The question was this: if you watchlist Giano's talk page, why? If you do, then why not talk to the man? If you do, why not help out? If you do, why not weigh in on other matters here? If you do not, then why here instantly to ''inform'' someone that you have determined, without consultation (of course), that his ''reaction'' to being blocked by an administrator who is ''knowingly abusing the block button'' (hence the "she was warned 4 hours before" talk) should be blocked for being angry at that? It's ugly. ] (]) 13:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| : Why are you antagonizing Giano for no practical reason? He's here on his talk page, minding his own business, expressing frustration that he just got blocked for no reason whatsoever. How about being a human and showing sympathy towards somebody who is rightly upset? ] <sup>]</sup> 13:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Just taking a quick look ]... ] (]) 13:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes I linked that for Theresa on her talk page earlier (after the block was made) ]] 13:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::This block was uncool. Giano's here on his talk page. Anybody who doesn't want to read hist comments can walk away. It's not like he was badgering somebody else on their talk page where they could not escape, nor was he chasing somebody away from an article. Those would be a different situations. I've mentioned this at ] in order to get a consensus for an unblock. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Oh that's all right then. Say what you like about people on your own talk page eh? It's all good here.] | ] 13:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::What immediate harm was he causing that necessitated the block? It is our custom to let aggrieved users vent on their own talk pages. Why did you apply a different standard to Giano than would normally be applied to any other user? Are you aware that ] prevents treating Giano as a special case. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| I have had a quick look at a couple of Arbs talk pages, and at AE, and cannot find anything about ArbCom agreeing this civility block, so I have undone it. If there is ArbCom permission for it and my sysop bits are suspended or removed I shall request that Theresa Knott is sanctioned for a similar period for not linking to that discussion/decision - I don't see why I have to fucking risk my flag because people are unable to follow fucking ArbCom decisions. Perhaps there ought to be a template on G's page pointing toward that link? Anyhow, I've unblocked and am now off to advise TK of my actions... like I am supposed to. ] (]) 13:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Oh Hai. Can everyone please clam down? TK may not have been aware of the arb decision when she made the block. ]] 13:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Giano was unblocked the last time I looked, and rightly too. | |||
| :I'm an admin. I block people. (This is what admins do. We can't help ourselves....) I like to think that my blocks are justified. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to learn that occasionally they're not justified. Whether they're justified or not, I'm sure that the blocked party has vivid fantasies concerning my cognitive capacities or what I should do with myself and with my private parts in particular. Maybe they express these on their own user talk page. (After all, where else could they?) This is entirely normal human behavior. A third party might tsk-tsk on my behalf, but that's quite enough concern for my feelings, thanks. -- ] (]) 13:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| '''Immediate saving of Misplaced Pages''': Let's look at all the horrible stuff Giano was doing that needed to be stopped before more evil was done, shall we? Look , all of you. ] (]) 13:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| My block was not based on a civility parole but based on his making three personal attacks above. I would have blocked anyone for gross incivility in this situation. How can repeated personal attacks against someone be condoned? Undo the block if you want. But I will not do it. ] | ] 13:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Your block was based on nothing! Have you done anything to stop Elonka blocking half of London. No, it was more important to you to constantly interupt me trying to write a page which I was halw way through with an "in ise" tag on. Congratulations even by the standards of Misplaced Pages worst Admins - you excell yourself! Sod the page go finish it yourself! ] (]) 13:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 00:59, 26 June 2023
Redirect to: