If you care to have a look, this article, which is GA now, could use a good pre-FAC review. PumpkinSkytalk 19:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I rarely review other people's work and then only if I understand the subject. Interestingly, I saw a huge cornflower saphire for the first time the other day, and offended its proud owner by asking if it was an topaz or an aqua marine which rather proves my point. I had no idea they came from America. Nice page though. GiacomoReturned 15:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking the time to look at it. Your view that it is a nice page is valued. There are some Kashmir sapphires close in color to Yogos. Casliber did a pre-FA review and recommended a second pair of eyes before FAC. PumpkinSkytalk 15:29, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You make out en-admins to be a ton more interesting then it really is. --Guerillero | My Talk 22:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think we heard that one back in 2007 too. But it was just as frightened to publish its logs then as it is now. Nothing changes on (or off) Wikipedia.GiacomoReturned 22:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is so minor it's not even worth its own sub-section, but this is most likely a misinterpretation of Elonka's post. I'm pretty, pretty, pretty sure Elonka endorsed the suggested principle ("Personal attacks are not permitted on Wikipedia, per the No Personal Attacks policy. No editors are exempt from this policy."), and not the comment right above. --Conti|✉ 20:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's my opinion that Elonka is a verbose female, who we all have to listen to too often. She should hush a little and take time to listen to her inner self, before she speaks. (Would you like me to translate that into Anglo-Saxon so that you can pillory me like Malleus?) GiacomoReturned 20:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just came here to inform you of the small mistake you made in your comment in the hopes that you would correct it, nothing more. :) --Conti|✉ 21:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You implied here that Elonka supported the "parasite" statement by Buster Seven. Unless I am very much mistaken, she did not. Her comment referred instead to the "No personal attacks" principle suggested in that section. --Conti|✉ 23:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Conti is correct. GiacomoReturned, you got it wrong. Except the part about me being a verbose female that you have to listen to. That part you got right. ;) --Elonka 23:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My dear Ms Dunin, verbosity is nothing to be proud of; I'm at a loss to understand what is happening on Wikipedia at the moment – the world has gone mad – people are shrieking and shouting because Mr Fatuorum used a word that most people listened to every morning in their cradle as their father instructed the gardener through the bedroom window. Then we have all all this talk of 'misogyny' – the only time I ever heard the word cause upset and confusion to womenfolk was when my beloved and belated Uncle Malaprop told my deaf aunt he was going to hire a punt on the river for the afternoon. All the women of my acquaintance know quite well when they are being insulted and abused and they are made of stronger stuff than to get a fit of the vapours when they hear a man cussing at no one in particular. I suspect very ulterior motives here or are the good, God fearing people of America quite so delicate? Catherine Rollbacker de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 09:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As the case clerk, I've tried to keep all contributions to the various case pages as constructive as possible; in this edit you posted what appears to be just a rant; as such, I've removed it. Since I believe the essence of your comment may be material to the decision of the case, you're welcome to rephrase it. SalvioLet's talk about it! 15:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh don't worry about it; I don't think anyone is seriously expecting a full or fair hearing there of the facts. That's not really what it's all about is it? I've been there before many times and as I never tire of saying here - nothing changes.GiacomoReturned 15:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia has complained that the 500 word evidence limit is hindering her from presenting all the evidence she would like. How about being flexible? Allow users to post longer evidence with permission if it is clear that they are not rambling or bringing in irrelevant materials. Giano is right that there can be no full or fair hearing, in my view, under these circumstances. JehochmanTalk 17:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can we just get one thing quite straight. This is not a fair hearing; it's not intended to be and it never was. It is a large group of editors who for a very long time have been irritated by Malleus Fatuorum - he gets under their skin. They have been waiting for him to make one slip-up so that they could pounce on him and disembowel him alive. It's rather like justice at the court of King Henry VIII. That he writes the project and they do not merely adds to their fury - this is a common lynching and King Henry and his court of judges are sitting idly by enjoying the spectacle. It is disgusting to behold. I really thought we had moved on from the scenes of a few years ago. GiacomoReturned 17:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have reverted carefully template-formatted inline citations to a more primitive arrangement, reinstated descriptions that lack WP:NPOV (e.g. of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough and Burford's 15th century vernacular architecture), and burdened the Burford Methodist Church article with an essay on English Baroque architecture that superfluous in an article about one town house in one market town.
If you want to add your "Ethos" essay to Wikipedia, the English Baroque article would be a more appropriate place for it. Any individual English buildings to which it may be applicable could then have links to it, whereas in the Burford Methodist Church article the essay would be unlikely to average more than half a dozen readers a day.
I'm afraid there is little point about writing about a building of little note, if one does not expain why it is of note and of interest. I don't like you method of referencing and I don't use it. There's a whole world outside of Oxfordshire, one needs to explain to that world why that building is of note. I shall continue to revert you if you insist on sinking the page to the provincial. Good morning. GiacomoReturned 21:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, how terrifying! I have replied to you [1]. Sometimes one wonders why one bothers. No wonder the British have such little appreciation for their heritage and culture, they are never allowed to learn about it. GiacomoReturned 22:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history at Burford Methodist Church shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.
If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.
Good essay, you have a talent for keeping the reader intrigued.--v/r - TP 04:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I had forgotten that was still lying arownd. A fortnight ago, I would have told you that it was out of date, events since Christmas make it seem rather relevant again - I must get around to polishing of the civility solution section; it may be needed. GiacomoReturned 10:30, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Giano! I'm trawling through a heap of user essays on incivility, and came across your section on Unwell Wikipedians ;P
My thoughts on this one are kinda ambiguous, as sometimes I really do feel that it may be helpful for other Wikipedias to know if there's a problem (I'm talking genuine problems here, not factitious ones, of course). For example, if someone's still recovering from a traumatic head injury, I think it's fair for them to let other editors know that there's a reason they may act out of character or have the occasional glitch in their work. We shouldn't ask them to stop editing until they're wholly well.
Personally, I'm awaiting some fairly complex neurosurgery on my neck, so I live with a combination of chronic pain and regular-use painkillers (including morphine from time to time) - I try not to use it as an "excuse", but it's handy to be able to explain, when I lapse, that pain+morphine=irritability+poor judgment.
I'd love it if you could include in your essay a few words on those who really are unwell and who try to do their best despite it, as at the moment it seems that your essay illustrates an extreme dislike for all people who are unwell, and kinda implies that everyone who's unwell is using it as an excuse for misbehaviour or a way of manipulating people. Could you see your way clear to adding a small section in defence of the well-meaning unwell? (>**)> Pesky (talk …stalk!) 18:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pesky, that essay was written about a million years ago and I had forgotten its even existance until the post above. I am sure there are many genuine sufferers on the project, but the odd thing is that (like yourself) they are not the ones who cause the problems - the people I refer to: arrive sick, stay sick, and enjoy their ill health and unless the Arbcom or the Lord (no, not Jimbo) decide otherwise remain with us. GiacomoReturned 19:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good essay - looking forward to reading the new edition when it comes out! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 20:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Like academics, most editors have some issues with obsessiveness, and so it is important we avoid interlocking spirals of conflict that lead only to doom.
All of us should forgive (without excusing) mistakes, when good people falter. Particularly when the hominids have interesting personalities and write well. God bless British culture, where it was cool to be a bit eccentric, according to my spies.
It is good that my chronic pain went away before I started editing. Morphine made my mouth as dangerous as Black Bolt's. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 01:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there Giacomo. What you up to? Right now my main thing on wiki is to take better pictures for Yogo sapphire. Problem is, i suck at taking pictures ;-) PumpkinSkytalk 00:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would love to help, but sadly, I don't seem to have a heap of saphires lying around the house to photograph. I'm not up to much right now, the brand new architectural article I wrote last week, that I had been intending to work on, has been locked becuase somone did not like the way I was writing it; so it is has to stay small and stubby, the way that the editor in question likes her pages to look - which is rather a pity, but a sign of the times. GiacomoReturned 08:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't asking you to help, but thanks for being willing. Too bad about the spat on that architecture article. I hope it works out for you soon without too much anguish.PumpkinSkytalk 11:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the reminder. I have unprotected that page. Please carry on. JehochmanTalk 13:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since "Williamite" is a style designation applied to the former Stoke Edith House, I've made an addition to "Williamite". Can you improve it? (I'd never use the term myself.)--Wetman (talk) 14:44, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's a new term for me, I have always called them Carolean. Would I be write in thinking that the now desyroyed Coleshill House wouldhave come under that umbrella? I will have a look around through the library tomoworrow (when I have more time). Very interesting. GiacomoReturned 16:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Mentmore groundfloor.jpg listed for deletion[edit]
File:Mentmore overhead 2.jpg listed for deletion[edit]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mentmore overhead 2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 09:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:MentmoreRooflessexpirement.jpg listed for deletion[edit]
I woul dhave thought that saying : "plan drawn by me for use in futire article; this is a prototye uploaded to see how it looks in scale and size. {{"PD-self}} Keep local) made it perfectly obvious to even the most stupid what the image is required for. Furthermore, it links to an unfinished page in user space. GiacomoReturned 09:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Giacomo. I was wondering where you stand on the SOPA blackout. Personally I think the blackout is a bad idea. If Jimbo and Sue (who does not speak for me) want to make a statement on SOPA, they should find another way. PumpkinSkytalk 03:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Politicizing what should be a neutral encyclopedia is a horrible idea. Now wiki is a political action committee. PumpkinSkytalk 03:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have not really been following the debate. I am in favour of the reasonable upholding of copyright laws. However, I rently read of the sad case of a young British student in breach of American copyright laws, he's about the same age as one of my own children, [3] and is being extradited to America (which is obviously a very unpleasant experience) and think that in the USA there is a certain amount of over zelousness concerning these matters. I am sure that the world will survive 24 hours without Wikipedia - I may even take it as an opportunity to rekindle the passion in my marriage. GiacomoReturned 09:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You don't know me but I'm looking for people I'd want to vote for in the upcoming elections. You're near the top of my list. So, would you put your hand up please, as a favour to an admiring stranger? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 01:14, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the thought, but from what I see of certain Abs currently acting out bullying spite and ignorance rather than their defined remit; I am more likely to return as Malleus’ avenging and terrible angel than an Arbitrator. It has always surprised me that a quasi-judicial body has never grasped the fundaments of their defined judicial system.
Malleus can be curt and rude; so what? So are half of the greatest men that I have ever met, and a couple of woman. Do the mealy mouthed and sanctimonious make the world turn and shake? – No they don’t. I’m sure he moderates his language when talking to children – and despite behavioural evidence to the contrary this is not a kindergarten. If one finds him so offensive, then make a polite request asking him to moderate his tone, if that fails – then call him an eccentric, an oaf, an oik and walk away – his good outweighs any harm; smile patronisingly at him and let him get on with it. So many Wikipedians would have a happier life if they learnt the art of the great putdown – and that’s not achieved with foul language - that goes to both Malleus and his antagonists.
Obviously, I have not forgotten Wikipedia and when I feel needed I shall return. I have lost none of my loathing for those wretched and disappointing individuals who wish to reduce Wikipedia to a Methodist picnic and I continue to feel that one can achieve more and be more honest if one has not been bestowed magical (and frankly ridiculous) powers by an American millionaire, calling himself a constitutional monarch – totally absurd. As for two-thirds of the Admins – well I don’t think we really need go there. So thank you for thinking of me, but I won’t be joining the Arbcom this year. Giano | talk 08:18, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is a pity. Giano, you won't know me either, but your reasons for not wanting to be in ArbCom are just the reason why ArbCom needs people like you. --Stfg (talk) 12:51, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hereby award you the Expert Barnstar for your outstanding contributions to architecture-related topics. This award is given to a few people who are regarded experts in one or several particular fields. Congrats and keep up your excellent work :)!--Tomcat(7) 21:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How very nice not to be forgotten. Thank you. Giano (talk) 08:50, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Giano! I've answered your question, just so you know. Long story short is I should update my userpage... Best, Keilana|Parlez ici 16:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've responded there again, hopefully to clarify somewhat. Best, Keilana|Parlez ici 17:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, but when you have been around Wikipedia as long as I have, one does not need a great many brain cells to spot history repeating itself. When made to look foolish or cornered, many Arbs and Admins behave like badly bred dogs and savage whoever they feel is responsible for their predicament. Unsurprisingly, like all the less intelligent animals, they are never able see themselves as the architects of their own misfortune; and in my experience, like all badly bred dogs they eventually go quite spectacularly off their heads. I suppose it’s in the nature of the beast. Giano (talk) 20:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that excellent is quite the right word, but we shall see. Anyway, it's nice to hear from you Puppy. Giano (talk) 21:03, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is excellent that you are back. What follows is yet to be determined. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:09, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I do hope you and your personal chaplain have regained the pleasure of editing (or at least watching as our ship sinks slowly in the west, and the sun pulls away from the shore). --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Giano, I have just posted these questions to Coren. The incident that is the basis for some questions is his block of you, the block John Vandenburg overturned, so I thought I should let you know about my post. Regards, EdChem (talk) 10:56, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, poor Coren and yet another of his attempts to sink me - wasn't that case over his friend, Rlevse, who having behaved very badly, then went spectacularly off his head, or am I thinking of another one? So many of them, one forgets. Coren always likes to portray me as mad, but fails to notice I appear to be calmly carryng on amid a sea of insanity from arbs and their sidekicks. I keep meaning to read all the current candidate statements, there's always at least a couple informing us that they are "unwell" which always turns out to be code for competely round the bend - I find it quite concerning. I might go over there later, out of Christian charity, and ask Coren a question, it may sooth him to unburden himself to me - something deep rooted in his childhod I exect - probably violently sick once on Ialian ice-cream. On all of your behalfs, I'll probe gently and see what I can find. Giano (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
À propos, Excellency, did you see me raking up Carcharoth's misspent youth here? I don't really believe in putting the former-arb candidates on the spot about every case they or the committee ever mishandled back in the 19th century, but Jimbo's role remains a sore point with me, and has certainly not been "resolved" as of the present moment. Carcharoth answered very well, I thought (everything considered). No excuses made. Bishonen | talk 15:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I actually rather enjoy gelato, and Italians will forever be holy to me for having properly understood that coffee requires respect and honor, quite unlike the ugly debasements North-Americans tend to inflict upon it. — Coren(talk) 17:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, what a shame, that’s that theory out of the window. I do wish though I could help you overcome your problems. It can’t be easy for you having these unhealthy feelings for other Arbs; believing that the moment Jumbo anoints them, they become living deities with a pontifical infallibility – abusing powers over the rest of us as they see fit; that is, of course, until they become so stark raving mad that even New York Brad can’t find an excuse. Sadly with such misconceptions, you are going to find life tres, tres hard. You need to unburden yourself; I’ll get a book on psychoanalysis out of the library and see what I can do to help you.Giano (talk) 17:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's an interesting position. Which feelings would you say are the unhealthy ones? Those of respect and trust towards those arbitrators I think are dedicated and concensious, those of furstration and annoyance at those I feel act without proper consideration of the consequences, or those of anger towards those whom I feel have behaved unethically or inapropriately? I mean, I had well over 15 very individual colleagues and felt differently about each of them; certainly it would help circumscribe the problem if you identified which of those feelings were unhealthy? — Coren(talk) 17:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it's always so sad when the memory begins to go; I am referring to Arbs abusing oversight and then having pages deleted which show their errors, and then you personally insulting [4], intimidating and initiating Arbitration cases (for your chums to try) against anyone who dares to point out that things are not as they should be. It must be very irritating for you, to begin cases against me on the grounds that lots of people have bought cases against me, but then learning they have almost without exception all collapsed becase they were bought by vindictive idiots - of which I consider you one. I was going to ignore you candidacy and jusy quietly oppose you, but seeing as you have decided to rake up old coals again; it looks like you are going to get burnt. Giano (talk) 17:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, of course. Had any of those things actually happened, I supposed I might see where you stood. Oh, well, I suppose I'll just have to suffer the burns of your indignation over the coals your pal EdChem raked up. — Coren(talk) 17:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
page that never happened]; even though it took months and was a complete whitewash to protect one of Coren's idiotic friends. Coren was so piqued, he then started a case against me also presumably never happened. Then of course we have Coren's Arb mate RLevse socking and insulting [5]. Coren of course won't condem such begaviour because we musn't criticise Arbs only nasty Giano for calling attention to it. I wonder if anyone will really vote for such people. (talk) 18:25, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Coren, I'm not keen on your "your pal EdChem" comment as I have had little contact with Giano. I asked my questions to see how you would reflect on your actions and to see if you would act differently if returned to ArbCom. I have certainly had my question answered, and in case you are wondering, I have concluded that you belong in the group of obviously-oppose candidates. Incidentally, if you are wondering why I took such an interest in the case, it was because I was upset by the absurdity of the original outing accusation and become more outraged as the situation was so comprehensively mishandled. Anyway, please do not attempt to imply that my actions are anything other than my own. EdChem (talk) 04:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ed, you must have a very vivid immagination because, didn't you read what Coren wrote, none of that "actually happened. Perhaps like me you are beconing "Giano, your paranoid delusions are taking a turn for the worse" [6](Ah err, no, you are not allowed to read that post of Coren's (& Shell Kinny (another late Arb) unless you are one of the priviledged few) It was actually deleted against concencus [7], an example of an Arcom with Coren and his mates in charge. Giano (talk) 18:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
.....I reactivated this, which has been quite fun, more fun than arbitrating in recent weeks anyway. Casliber (talk·contribs) 04:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tres amusanti, but I don't recall that very informative and useful page featuring an all singing and dancing bodily movement, which is altogether different. I was also very much younger then and neither did I have my gracious and noble aunt editing over my shoulder. Besides which, South Park was complete crap anyway, and I recall Mrs G banning all the little Gs from watching it. If turds must talk, it's best if they don't have American accents. We in Europe like a little subtlety, and that aint subtle. Giano (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Subtlety is something that South Park could never be found guilty of having... BencherliteTalk 17:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very true. I merely feel that a talking turd is not a very good advert for Wikipedia, and at the end of the day, like it or lump it, that's what the main page article is. This is supposed to be a serious, educational project. What next? The memoirs of Cripsin the Talking Condom or Timothy Tampon? Giano (talk) 20:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You used the word "Montacue" in a description of the new W&G film. Does the film use that spelling as a joke, or did you accidentally delete the t? All I can see from the trailer is that the hall is clearly based on the design of the real house (cf Tottington Hall, which Nick Park acknowledged as based on Montacute).
Of where are we talking? I can't remember making such an edit in the recent past. What exactly is a W&G film? Giano (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How extraordinary; I had no idea that I had even been that far down the page; I have corrected the accidental deletion of the T. Wallace and Gromit indeed; having now looked up these people, I do wonder if a the house being loosley like a cartoon house is really worthy of a mention, but I suppose that we have to cater for all tastes and it might just awaken an interest in architecture is some cartoon obsessed 4-year-old. Giano (talk) 09:14, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Anyway, I'll correct the reference and, given that it's there in the "popular culture" cellar, expand it a tad. David Brooks (talk) 22:20, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Giano II. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 21:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I see you're hard at work at Palladian architecture. If you're considering taking it to FAC and would like a third-party-irritatingly-pedantic copyedit from an editor who knows absolutely nothing about the subject, please feel free to drop me a line. Btw, I considered saying "welcome back", but I confess, I'm too confused to know whether or not that's appropriate, so if it's appropriate, consider it said. --Dweller (talk) 09:43, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that's very, very kind. However, I was only freshening it up a little and decluttering it. I actually wrote it and took it to FAC some years ago and won it a little star! :-) You can say welcome back; I am restored to you all and firing on all 8 cylinders. Giano (talk) 09:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
<smacks head> Can't believe that I missed the star. OK, so hold my offer of teeth-grindingly-annoying-ignorance-of-architecture for your next FAC. --Dweller (talk) 10:08, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry about it - my first laugh of the day. Keep the offer in mind; someone is bound to read this exchange and FAR it. Giano (talk) 10:11, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS:That's not to say that it couldn't still do with a copy-edit. In my view, the page has never adequatly explained the difference between Palladian architecture and Palladio's architecture which are not the same thing at all. I see someone at some time has even changed a section heading to 'Neo-Palladian architecture' which is a contradiction in terms. Giano (talk) 10:25, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Giano, I've often wanted to get the chance to talk to you. I agree with (almost) all that you say on Mally's talk, no doubt. First I do have to admit that in many ways I was raised with the "Puritanical" mindset that's often discussed. My parents also taught me to think beyond what I was told, to meet people and learn from them as well. In a sense I view you and Malleus as two opposite ends of the civility spectrum. By that I mean only that it is/was easier for me to deal with and talk to Mally when he would say something like "any chance of you pulling your head out of your ass"? To me personally that was much less offensive than reading something like ... "your obvious lack of intellectual insight obviously leaves you bereft of any cognitive abilities". Both statements hurt, but there's a straightforward honesty to the first that I respect. With the second statement? It's an air of arrogance that infuriates me. Trying to get back on point though - yes, this is English Wikipedia, NOTAmerican Wikipedia. With that in mind then yes, I do try to keep in mind that a European mindset, or Australian thought process is different than an American one. I will screw up on a daily basis, but I'm willing to listen and learn. I did get to spend 10 days in Spain when I was a teenager - but beyond that, no, I haven't had the ability to travel the world as others have.
I suppose I could go into the "gun laws" topic, but for now - I'll just say thank you for taking the time to talk to me. While I don't edit in the areas of architecture or European history, I do very much admire your work. Apologies for any stray commas, it's just how I insert a brief pause in a sentence. — Ched : ? 10:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have a great many RL American friends and more than a few relations - albeit mostly on the Northern states. Neither am I particularly uncivil, I can make conversation without cussing, eat a meal using a knife and fork and keep my mouth closed while doing so - I only ever put a spoon in my mouth if drinking soup; and I stand up when a woman enters the room. I help old ladies across the road and pat dogs on the head. On occassions, I can tolerate fools, what I cannot tolerate is ignorant, bigoted and narrow minded idiots - no matter where they come from. Sadly, on Wikipedia, in my experience, many of the ignorant and civility-obsessed Admins come from North America - perhaps that's because there are more of you or perhaps it's because you all run around being charming to each other - which suggests a rather dull race. So I hope it's the former. As for American gun laws: all I can rather brutally and cruelly say is that a nation that won't toughen up its gun laws had better get used to such dreadful happenings. Attrocities happen in the best regulated countries, but common sense says that they will happen more frequently in the lesser regulated. So America has two choices there - change or endure. Giano (talk) 13:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to find out how your user page works, couldn't find the window to the builder, nor would the link be informative, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! Thanks to the miracle of email, I have found this section, thank you for the award, I had not seem it before. My user page is an initiative test, to find the site builder you have to click on one of the urns, I have forgotten which one, but it should lead you to Jack, perhaps the sinister "They" deleted it when they chopped his head off. Giano (talk) 19:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see some things differently, starting from the back: "They" didn't chop his head off, the rabbit escaped making them think they did. - An urn is the right place after cremation (love the picture!), I should have thought of that ;) (It's the small one on the right.) - The talk of Jack is empty, this is full, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all got your very kind messages; I shall be resuming normal editing in the very near future. Giano (talk) 12:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
