Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Raul654 (talk | contribs) at 03:42, 28 November 2007 (→FrankenGiano). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Old messages are at

• User talk:Giano II/archive 1 (2004)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 2 (2005)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 3 (2005)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 4 (2006)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 5 (2006)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 6 (2007)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 7 (2007)

• 20.52: Jimbo on Giano's contributions
• 22.14: Giano on his contributions
• 15.25: Jimbo says I was not aiming at Giano
• 19.21: Giano says, oh yes you bloody was

Misrepresenting that conversation

You are misrepresenting that conversation. I was directly referring to DTobias's remark, just above, and someone mistook that part of my remarks as referring to you. It did not. I referred to people who are not here to build an encyclopedia. Your content contributions are voluminous, high quality, and much appreciated.

That doesn't change the fact that your behavior in terms of trolling and carrying on the way you do is unacceptable. You know this. And you will either change it or be banned from Misplaced Pages. You have caused too much harm to justify us putting up with this kind of behavior much longer.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

• Ah Jimbo, I think we will have to agree to differ there, my views on trolling are here . Giano (talk) 11:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Summary: In a debate about blocking Giano for posting "private" email where Dan was defending him, you responded under Dan's comment but named only Giano.

Conclusion: since they were both in agreement, your comment ambiguously applied to both. In any event, the distinction seems trivial.

On an unrelated topic, may I ask your position on the merits of whistleblowing? sNkrSnee | t.p. 01:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be more accurate to say that your statement was confusing than that other people are misrepresenting it. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

And it would be a lot more accurate to say that Durova has caused harm than that Giano has. Harm? It's not the whistleblower that does the harm. bishzilla _ROARR!! 15:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC).

Perhaps my new article Favourite is more Wiki-topical than I realized? Johnbod (talk) 15:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

"One who stands unduly high in the favour of a prince." Check. Bishonen | talk 15:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC).

Well, we all know what happens to favourites in the end, according to the history books. Favourite should be compulsory reading here, remembering that the equivalents here are virtual. Carcharoth (talk) 00:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

So I'm the one who's "not here to build an encyclopedia"? That gives me a warm feeling... *Dan T.* (talk) 22:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks as though my Thanksgiving break was a total bore compared to things around here. From an outsider, I found the quote by Jimbo above to be unbelieveable: "You have caused too much harm to justify us putting up with this kind of behavior much longer.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)" - Wow. Just wow. How many featured articles do you have again, Giano? --SGT Tex 19:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactly one too many. sNkrSnee | ¿qué? 19:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Legal threat by Durova or overstepping of authority by Cary Bass?

Here is a very interesting discussion by Kelly Martin of the status of the material that Giano was blocked for posting. Bishonen | talk 17:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC).

For being the gadfly that WP badly needs,

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For telling it like it is. -- Mr Which 02:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Your immeasurable Wiki-xperience required

I require your assistance on Ybor City, Tampa, Florida, an article I ran into a while back and noted that the tone was, while interesting to read, probably inappropriate for a Misplaced Pages article and I took it up with the author on the talk page. He initially took into consideration my concerns, but then he reverted himself, returning it to its original form. I didn't want to cause a confrontation so I left it alone, but kept it on my watchlist.

Recently though, another editor made note of the fact on the talk page and replaced the tone banner I originally put on the article those months ago. The author reacted violently to this and promptly reverted him, citing consensus, though to be fair the consensus consisted of his views and another editor affiliated with the Tampa WikiProject. I replaced the banner and aired my concerns again when it flashed on my watchlist, and then I was promptly accused of sockpuppetry and the banner was reverted again by this same author.

Since you are an author yourself, having written many articles, I was looking for your input. I am not actually sure whether I am in the right, and I do not have enough encyclopedic writing experience to press the point any further. Could you go to that article for me, read it, and give your evaluation on the talk page? The editor who is involved is clearly a good writer but I don't know how to talk to him. If you cannot assist, could you refer this to someone who can?

I immediately thought of you though, as you're probably one of the most experienced and talented Misplaced Pages editors I know. DEVS EX MACINA _pray 04:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Not been a good few days. Tomorrow may be. Giano (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just clicked, it's a spoof, it is isn't it.......Giano (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. It's an actual article written by an actual person. I really don't want to get into this any further without some expert advice on how to talk to him, or even you talking to him yourself.. I know these last week has been a bit of a rollercoaster ride for you and you're very busy, so there's no rush at all. But if I attempt to deal with this editor, I just know I'm going to explode and say something stupid. DEVS EX MACINA _pray 22:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I can't think why, it is quite a nice bus, a little yellow perhaps, but as buses go....Giano (talk) 22:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Does the article have tone problems or is it just my imagination? I'm still learning.. hehe DEVS EX MACINA _pray 23:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's have a look at it tomorrow, but as a rule of thumb one generally does not begin an encyclopedic article with the words "Mr. Ybor Comes to Town". It sounds more like Noddy and Big Ears than Misplaced Pages. Giano (talk) 23:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration

I have requested you be added to the list of parties at this arbitration. Mercury 04:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Please do not come here asking me to perform in a circus which should not be taking place. The only thing that can possibly emerge from that arena is proof of a catalogue of incompetence by high ranking Wikipedians (note:I have not named them.) These people should have:

A: Read the post to their mailing list and advised against, or if necessary (they have the power) and bearing in mind previous blocks prohibited Durova blocking !!.

B: Over a week later when she did block, they should have looked at the evidence and though "Fuck! - this can't come out, it's ridiculous." and then promptly and quietly advised Durova to hand over the tools, retire from "sleuthing" and become quiet for a few weeks. They did not.

C:This entire escalated mess is entirely the fault of Durova and those Wikipedians who wanted to save her at any price. Now they are finding the price is too expensive for them - they are looking to others to pay the bill. Well, go and look elsewhere this Wikipedian is notoriously mean. Giano (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Giano...there have been some remedies proposed on that arbcom case workshop page that you should examine (scroll down)...don't blow your stack man! Nothing is going to happen to you so long as I have any say in it...but be cool!--MONGO (talk) 08:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• There really is no helping them, is there? Giano (talk) 08:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well...all I can say is that I definitely understand why you would be pissed off...you have every right to be. But, (and this applies to me as well, BTW), we cannot allow our passions about an issue or event control what we type. I am finding that a margarita helps me look at things from a less serious perspective.--MONGO (talk) 09:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I was going to stay out of it but as they clearly want me there - lets' go! Giano (talk) 12:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Adding Giano to the case is sorta like making the guy who calls the cops to report that two people are fighting in the road a defendant in their trial. The Arbitration is about Durova's conduct. Giano is just the guy who stood up and said "Hey! Something bad going on!" Kelly Martin 13:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Kelly, shifting the focus away from the issue is a standard defensive modus operandi. When confronted with damning evidence that cannot be easily explained,

• Shift the focus to others.
• Point out anything resembling misconduct on their part.
• Attack their credibility.
• Cast doubt on their motives.
• Smear their character.
• Misinterpret their actions.
• And, at all costs, avoid addressing the issue directly.

Attacking the character, reputation and motives of her detractors is typical and Durova has done this to me as well. At one point, she found an ascii SMILE :) that, as a newbie, I had posted on another newbie's page and concluded this was APPEARANCE of impropriety

And here, when I objected to her methods on WP:CSN, she tried to discredit me by taking innocent edits and claimed they were evidence of collusion, and suggested that I be investigated.

I'm no longer surprised by anything she does... though she will undoubtedly find a way. Lsi john (talk) 14:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Clarify: I did not mean to imply that she is the one trying to drag Giano into this arbitration. Lsi john (talk) 14:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I think there are plenty of others to do that. My views on all this unseemly shouting are here . Giano (talk) 14:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Giano has no place in the arbitration. If people are really so sure of the issues of passing a passed-around e-mail to Misplaced Pages that they know in their hearts, minds, and balls that it is a massive violation of something or other, then they can bring that up in a case solely about that. Otherwise, naming Giano is nothing but an attempt at spraying mud. I hear that cuttle fish, when cornered, shoot out clouds of ink. (Yes, this is parataxis.) Utgard Loki (talk) 15:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Than you Utgard, can I just make it quite clear once and for all it was not an email it was a post. There is avery subtle difference which I am not going into right now. Giano (talk) 15:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

As an aside- is the list under the GNU Free Documentation License as it seems to be, because there is a pic of the moose at the bottom of it? So all posts to it are licenced under the GNU- not a very subtle difference at all- unless you call the giant head of a moose subtle.:)Merkinsmum (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's just leave all the legal issues for a while and see what happens. Giano (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The Italian Stallion

Giano, you rock. Did you see this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noromasiobmij (talk • contribs) 20:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

No I have not and I don't want to. Now go away before you get us all banned. I would never wear a pink bath robe anyway. Giano (talk) 20:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For your kind words of encouragement. I simply hope that the effort to reduce "drama" does not result in a railroaded solution for anyone. I am stunned at how quickly this case has gone from acceptance to proposed decisions.

Incidentally...I spotted you in the above picture. No, not the one with the bus, the campaign photo. You're the one with the red boots, right? Risker (talk) 22:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages can move very fast when it needs to. No, it seems I doomed for ever to wear a pink bath robe! Giano (talk) 22:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's that phase of the film where one shouts, "Yo, Adrian!" Geogre (talk) 12:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Wrong page

I think you accidentally posted to the wrong page. - Jehochman 21:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you? Giano (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Me thinks not. Lsi john (talk) 21:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

To the arbitrators! you judged Durova in five minutes flat and then left the case open to Tony Sidaway's comments (what is he doing on every arb page anyway) and prattle about me in the hope something more definitive could be resolved. Presumably a nice long block. While Jimbo and his threats hover on my page, an aggrieved creature called Agne berates !! on his page and ANI for feeling uncharitable. What are you all so frightened of? I want to know who are the famous 5 . Just look at the scramble taking place as we speak to close the case - we are seeing Misplaced Pages history in double time. Giano (talk) 21:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman

You have been added at as a party to the above Arbitration case per this passed motion. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 00:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

FrankenGiano

An interesting side note, I think, is the ire directed at Giano for having the temerity to be righteously indignant at Durova's flatly bizarre logic for concluding that !! was a malicious editor. Giano is only a problem when other Wikipedians are being stupid. When people aren't behaving stupid enough to set him off, he's a perfectly productive (and in fact quite good) article editor. But when he detects stupidity in progress, he turns into some sort of FrankenGiano and goes off on a rampage, tearing through the pretty paper walls the wikicommunity has set up to protect its sensibilities while trying, in his unimitable and somewhat lovable way, to protect the project he quite clearly cares about deeply. I used to strongly dislike Giano, mainly because I and others I identified with had been the target of his rage. Having watched him go off on someone who, at least this time, I agree deserved it, gives me a new respect for him, and I'm much more inclined to forgive him for the arrows he slung at me back in the day. Giano isn't perfect, and I think sometimes his indignance is misplaced, but I can't question his commitment to the project. Jimbo's threat to ban him was stupid, and reflects how badly Jimbo has lost his way on this project. - Kelly Martin's blog

On a more serious note, Giano, we (the arbcom) have probably spent more time discussing you over the last two years than any other person on Misplaced Pages. We like you as a contributor, but (as KM implies above) your participation in any dispute tends to make this much more inflamed and ugly - even when you're right (which, I happen to think, is most or all of the time). Your methods are simply too destructive. So, I'm going to put the question to you directly -- what do we do? Raul654 (talk) 03:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)